Arctic Policy for Canada's Tomorrow: A Review Essay

As a result of climate change, a new region is opening up. The melting of the polar ice in the Arctic, however slow it may be, unlocks huge reserves of minerals and hydrocarbons, makes new coastal passages navigable, and changes northerners' way of life. At the same time, the risks of intrusion, of pollution, and of environmental deterioration grow. No wonder that these developments have spurred a lively debate in every Arctic country, especially in Canada, which has an extensive frontier on the Arctic Ocean and large land holdings in the polar region. Diverging interests and competing claims in the Arctic could potentially lead to regional conflicts. Three well-known Canadian experts on the north - Franklyn Griffiths of the University of Toronto, Rob Huebert from Calgary, and F. Whitney Lackenbauer from Waterloo - have written a series of well-thought-through papers on the future of the Arctic. They want to start Canadians on their way to discussing and designing an adequate Arctic strategy. The terminology of all three contributions, however, is slightly confusing, at least to a foreigner. The authors use the term "Arctic" alternatively for the Canadian north - the country's polar region stretching north of the Arctic Circle (66° 30'), the territory north of the 10° C isotherm in July - and the lands beyond the tree line. In this piece, "Arctic" will connote the larger, circumpolar region, and "north" the Canadian north. In a similar mode, the terms are applicable to the Norwegian or the Russian north. Following this terminology, "Canada's northern strategy," recently published by Indian Affairs and Northern Development Canada, focuses mainly on the Canadian north. In but eight short paragraphs on its international dimensions, the strategy emphasizes effective Canadian stewardship of its sovereignty in the face of new challenges and highlights Canada's willingness to work closely with its northern neighbours. Otherwise, the document offers a shopping list of programs that had been commissioned earlier. The critical question, though, is whether the government will follow through. Doubts about its willingness lend credibility to our authors' complaints that Canada is badly equipped for the international challenges of the Arctic and needs a really new, proactive Arctic strategy to cope with them.