Canada’s Arctic Agenda: A Changing Strategic Landscape

Name: Canada’s Arctic Agenda: A Changing Strategic Landscape
Uploaded: 2023-06-16T10:00:38.000Z
Duration: 3 h 14 min 1 s

Introduction

The introduction provides an overview of the webinar and introduces the three panelists.

Panelists

Dr. Petra Dulayda is an associate professor and former Canada Research Chair in the history of energy at the University of Calgary.

Robert Hubert is a professor at the Department of Political Science at the University of Calgary.

Thomas Axworthy has had a distinguished career in government, academia, and philanthropy.

Importance of Canada's Arctic

This section discusses why Canada's Arctic is important from a national identity, policy, and political standpoint.

Key Points

Canada's Arctic is central to its national identity as an order nation with tremendous potential for its future.

The Arctic transcends foreign environmental continental and economic priorities for Canada and for indigenous communities that call it home.

The Arctic has been a significant factor in Canada's domestic political landscape as well as informed its diplomatic thinking during the Cold War.

Canadian Arctic Security

This section discusses Canadian Arctic security from historical and contemporary perspectives.

Key Points

During the Cold War, Canada joined with the United States to create NORAD to counter threats from the Soviet Union using missile pathways through the Arctic.

Today, due to climate change, new opportunities are being unlocked in shipping routes, fishing reserves, critical minerals, and energy resources making it a geostaturated priority for countries seeking low-carbon digital solutions.

Canada's Arctic Strategy

This section discusses the Arctic strategies of various nations, including Canada's efforts to enhance its military capabilities in the region.

International Interest in the Arctic

Norway has published an Arctic strategy that focuses on legal international frameworks for territory integrity and working alongside other North countries and the EU.

NATO Secretary General Jen Stoltenberg visited the Canadian Arctic to underline its strategic importance for Euro-Atlantic security.

Non-Arctic nations like China and India have developed Arctic strategies to expand their capabilities in the region by cooperating with Russia for energy supplies and with liberal democratic Arctic nations on green energy, food security, and low-cost digital networks.

Canada's Efforts in the Region

In 2019, Canada released the Arctic and Northern Policy Framework, which laid out its vision for a strong self-reliant people and communities working together for a vibrant, prosperous, and sustainable Arctic and Northern region.

Ottawa has placed investments in enhancing Canadian Armed Forces' ability to operate in the region through expenditure operations, space-based systems, joint intelligence surveillance and reconnaissance research and development.

However, with a shifting geopolitical landscape affecting Canada's strategic foresight across all three of its geo-security peripheries simultaneously (Eastern Europe/Ukraine conflict; global economic rise of Indo-Pacific; challenges posed by China), it is struggling to manage advance attain national interests.

The Importance of the Arctic to Canada

This section highlights why Thomas Axworthy believes that the arctic is critical to Canada's future security and prosperity.

Strategic Significance of Critical Minerals

The broader strategic competition with Russia and China in the Arctic and North may have significant critical minerals that are part of the future economic and military competition.

Canada has 30 odd critical minerals heavily concentrated in the Arctic, making it an intelligent country to put in infrastructure development from roads to bandwidth to make it possible to have Canada as a safe, secure supply of these vital elements.

Strategic Area of Confrontation

Russia is a neighbor of Canada across the Arctic Ocean and has made massive investments in its Arctic capabilities over the last decade. This is a potential strategic area of confrontation with NATO, with Finland joining and Sweden soon.

For many reasons, including strategic goals, the Arctic should have tremendous primacy among Canada's priorities.

Capability Question

While the arctic region is critical to Canada's future security and prosperity, there is still much work needed on capability questions such as Canadian soldiers having to buy their own helmets in Latvia; not enough aircraft for NATO missions; auditor general issuing devastating reports on our capabilities; years behind ordering equipment that needs replacement.

Canada's Arctic Security Threats

In this section, the speakers discuss the three existential threats that Canada faces in its Arctic region.

Climate Change

The melting ice is fundamentally altering the nature of the entire Arctic region.

Climate change is an existential threat to Canada's national security.

The Arctic will no longer be as much a part of Canada as it used to be.

Geopolitical Threat

The geopolitical threat is a core security foundation for Russia and the US.

Russia has modernized its nuclear deterrent and war-fighting capabilities in the Arctic.

Putin added development of weapon systems to counter American systems developed in the 1990s.

Political Elite System

Many political elites ignore security threats within the Arctic.

Political leaders performative art on sovereignty but do not act on it.

Lack of action by political elites is a threat to Canadian North.

Why Should Canada Invest More in Its Arctic Region?

In this section, foreign policy experts discuss why investing more in Canada's Arctic region is essential.

National Interest

The Arctic is undoubtedly in Canada's national interest.

Historically, foreign policy commitments have been challenging to balance with investments in the changing world.

The Arctic in International Security

In this section, the speakers discuss the importance of the Arctic in international security and how it fits into Canada's foreign policy portfolio. They also touch on the changing dynamics in the region and how history can inform our understanding of current events.

Importance of the Arctic in International Security

The question is not necessarily whether there should be more capacity or activity in the Arctic, but rather if it is feasible given limited funds.

As a historian, it's important to consider how a changing international security scenario affects different regions and thematic areas. It's legitimate to ask how important the Arctic should be in Canada's general portfolio of dealing with a changing international security scenario.

While Russia may look similar to its Cold War self, history does not repeat itself. There are other logics at play beyond national rivalry that need to be considered when thinking about the Arctic.

Depending on how you focus on what you consider as challenges facing Canada in the Arctic, it can become a North American circumpolar kind of logic or vision when maybe it should be something else.

Complexity and Nuances

It's important to avoid putting all your eggs in one basket by focusing solely on hardware or particular capabilities needed for the Arctic.

Any money that goes towards developing capacity or activity in the Arctic will not go elsewhere within Canada's foreign policy portfolio. Therefore, it's crucial to talk to everyone about why such choices are being made.

Canada as an Arctic Power

In this section, the speakers discuss Canada's status as an Arctic power and whether it should be considered an earth to power. They also touch on how Canada sees itself in the Arctic within the power classification in international relations.

Canada's Status as an Arctic Power

The 2010 statement on Canada's Arctic foreign policy affirmed Canada's status as an Arctic power and declared sovereignty as the country's number one Arctic foreign policy priority.

As the second largest Arctic country by geography and with the second largest GDP among the Arctic council members, along with a historical identity for being Antarctic Steward, there is a question of whether Canada should be considered an earth to power.

Holding a status as an earth to power could provide greater opportunities for Ottawa to sustain its territorial maritime sovereignty, acquire needed hard power capabilities, reaffirm its continental and extra-regional capabilities for Arctic security, and project into the North Atlantic and Pacific.

Implications of Being an Earth to Power

However, there are concerns that holding such a status could hinder Canada's strategic posture in a changing global and regional landscape. It is important to consider how we see ourselves in relation to other powers when thinking about our role in the region.

Investing in Arctic Capabilities

In this section, the speakers discuss the importance of investing in Arctic capabilities for Canada's foreign policy and defense. They argue that by investing in the Arctic, Canada can improve its relationship with the United States and increase its influence within NATO.

Importance of Investing in Arctic Capabilities

There is a need for tremendous investment in Nunavut's transportation needs, including a deep sea port and refueling station.

Investing in Arctic capabilities will help improve Canada's relationship with the United States and increase its influence within NATO.

The Nordic countries joining together will make large changes within NATO itself, and Canada could increase its influence within the alliance by investing more in Arctic capabilities.

By investing in the Arctic, Canada can make a difference for two of its most important relationships - with the United States and transatlantic Europe.

Becoming an Arctic Power

In this section, Thomas Rob discusses whether Canada needs to become an air to power or just develop capabilities to be a prominent Arctic power when it comes to security and defense.

Developing Capabilities as an Arctic Power

Norway established security arrangements with Sweden and Finland to coordinate their security policies and operational capabilities.

The core variables that shape the importance of the Arctic remain fundamentally unchanged since 1962-63.

Currently, Canada does not act as an identified "Arctic power" but has issued a framework for interacting with the Arctic.

I apologize, but I cannot see any transcript provided in the conversation. Please provide me with the transcript so that I can create a comprehensive and informative markdown file from it.

Canada's Arctic Policy

In this section, the speakers discuss Canada's lack of political willingness to engage as an Arctic power and its poor record in economic development. They also touch on the challenges and opportunities within the region.

Historical Position of Canada as an Arctic Power

Petra discusses the historical position of Canada as an Arctic power and how any government will have to face a tough decision in a changing international system.

Petra argues that it is not useful to talk about whether Canada should be an Arctic power or not, but rather focus on how interconnected and intricate Arctic policy is.

Petra highlights that Arctic policy is not only foreign policy but also development policy, indigenous policy, industrial policy, among others.

Economic Development in the Canadian Arctic

The speakers mention Heather Exner-Pirot's research pointing out that Canada has the worst record of all European American states when it comes to economic development in any type of resource.

Heather Exner-Pirot's research shows that Northern communities want economic security rather than simply turning the Arctic into a parkland.

Petra argues that comparing infrastructure in European and Canadian arctic regions is unfair since they don't start at the same benchmark.

Investing in the Arctic

Petra questions what kind of security investing in the arctic means for whom and by whom. She suggests investing in relationship building and trust-building instead of just military hardware.

Petra suggests investing more in soft military side, such as search and rescue, surveillance, monitoring, and technology like radar and satellites.

Canadians and the Arctic

The speaker discusses the challenges of making Canadians aware of their status as an Arctic nation, and the need for capacity building to address energy poverty in the region. They also question whether infrastructure alone is enough to attract corporate actors to invest in the Arctic.

Being a northern nation isn't the same as being an Arctic nation.

It's difficult to make Canadians aware of what's happening in the Arctic if they're not interested, and capacity building can happen in various ways.

Renewable energy resources are replacing diesel, but there is still a focus on exploiting minerals.

Infrastructure alone may not be enough to attract corporate actors to invest in the Arctic, and it's important to understand each community's interests.

Russia's militarization of the Arctic

The speaker discusses how Russia's recent militarization of the Arctic affects contemporary governance structures and Canada's interests in the region.

The concept of "Arctic exceptionalism" has been threatened by Russia's recent efforts to elevate its securitization or militarization of the region.

Russia is demonstrating its ability to defend its claims and deterrence capabilities through large-scale military operations and investments in military hardware.

This shift towards a more conscious military and hard power perspective affects contemporary governance structures, particularly given that the Arctic was once considered a zone of peace.

The Russian Nuclear Capability and the Arctic

In this section, the speaker discusses the development of Russian weapon systems and their focus on defeating American systems. They also talk about Russia's reactivation of bases along its northern areas and how it relates to their nuclear capability.

Russian Weapon Systems

Russians were looking at American weapon systems such as the Patriot system, intermediate systems, and Strategic Defense.

Development of Poseidon, an unmanned torpedo that is atomic-powered.

Development of hypersonics that can be fired from submarines or married to the mig-31.

All these systems are made to defeat American systems.

The Importance of the Arctic

Geography technology means that militarization has occurred in the Arctic region.

Reactivation of 20 over 22 bases along its northern areas with a war fighting capability.

It's not discretionary because if Putin finds himself in a second phase of Ukrainian War he has been increasing political threats about utilizing nuclear weapons.

Deterrence

We need to convince Russians that old-fashioned deterrence works.

NORAD modernization is necessary for deterrence.

Terrifying States

What happens if Russians are thinking about having new nuclear war fighting tactical sense?

Factor in cyber warfare and social media attacks that call us divide divisions.

Deterrence and Arctic Security

The discussion focuses on the concept of deterrence in the Arctic, the need for Arctic security, and why Russia's militarization matters.

Importance of NORAD Modernization

Canada needs to get serious about NORAD modernization due to indicators that deterrence is no longer effective.

The militarization of what Russia does matters because it affects Arctic security.

Assembling with like-minded countries within NATO or with the United States through NORAD can be a way to address this issue.

Human Security Dimension in the Arctic

There is a tremendous human security dimension to the Arctic, including food and medical security, isolation of communities, opportunities for young people, etc.

Broadband access is one of the most important infrastructure investments needed in the region.

Suicide rates are also a major concern that requires greater investment.

Military Security in the Arctic

Icebreakers and ice-capable patrol ships are high demand but low-density assets for NATO.

Canada is deficient on both human and military security in this critical part of the world.

European leaders are very afraid of what the future may hold regarding Russian threats about using nuclear weapons.

Cooperation around Search and Rescue

Diplomacy can cooperate around search and rescue, environmental science, prevention of oil spills which makes sense.

The Arctic Council is not operating because of Russia's suspension, but cooperation around these issues makes sense.

The Importance of Continued Investment in the Arctic Council

In this section, the speaker emphasizes the importance of continuing investments in the Arctic Council and maintaining partnerships with European and American partners. They suggest that if Russian military threats are lessened, Russia can be invited back into the council.

Key Points:

The speaker suggests that a series of investments should continue to be made in the Arctic Council.

Partnerships with European and American nations invested in creating a de facto Arctic Council operating structure should be maintained.

If Russian military threats are lessened, they can be invited back into the council.

Balancing Investments in Traditional Notions of Security and Sustainable Development

In this section, Thomas Petro discusses how investing in one area means underinvesting in another. He questions whether it is possible to have a balanced approach when it comes to traditional notions of security while addressing insecurities encountered by Canada in the Arctic.

Key Points:

Investing in one area means underinvesting in another.

It may not be possible for Canada to have a balanced approach given current international security climate limitations.

There may need to be a different formula for addressing insecurities encountered by Canada in the Arctic.

A Balanced Approach to Arctic Policy

In this section, the speaker discusses how balancing approaches is an interesting way of looking at things. They mention writing a brief for the European Parliament on creating a balanced Arctic policy for EU.

Key Points:

Balancing approaches is an interesting way of looking at things.

The speaker wrote a brief for the European Parliament on creating a balanced Arctic policy for EU.

It may not be possible for Canada to actively balance given limitations and need to react at any given moment.

Different Conclusions Based on Historical Perspectives

In this section, the speaker discusses how different conclusions can be made based on historical perspectives. They mention that while Europe sees Russia as an aggressive state, they do not think that Russia would attack any NATO countries.

Key Points:

Different conclusions can be made based on historical perspectives.

While Europe sees Russia as an aggressive state, they do not think that Russia would attack any NATO countries.

Understanding Russian Capabilities

In this section, the speaker discusses how understanding Russian capabilities is important in figuring out what needs to be addressed first. They mention that while Russians have attacked neighboring countries, there is no imminent danger or threat of being attacked by Russia.

Key Points:

Understanding Russian capabilities is important in figuring out what needs to be addressed first.

There is no imminent danger or threat of being attacked by Russia according to most people quoted in the standing committee on National Defense report.

The Complexity of Arctic Security

In this section, Petra Dolata discusses the complexity of Arctic security and emphasizes that there is no essentialist way of determining what the Russian threat should mean in terms of a response. She also highlights the importance of understanding different time frames and technology when discussing security issues.

Understanding Arctic Security

Expertise is Western, so it's more complex than just talking about optics.

Challenges and human security dimensions are different in NWT Yukon compared to Nunavut.

Capacity building on the ground is more important than providing human security for people in the Arctic.

There is no essentialist way of determining what the Russian threat should mean in terms of a response because there are differences between regions.

Canadians need to be aware that there are choices when it comes to responding to threats.

Time Frames and Technology

It's important to understand different time scales, especially with military technology having a long lead time.

As a historian, Petra emphasizes the importance of understanding different time frames.

The Role of the Arctic Council

In this section, Rob Huebert discusses the role of the Arctic Council as an intergovernmental forum for enhancing cooperation on Arctic issues. He notes that while some experts view it as not being enough, it has been successful in incorporating positions from various groups on sustainable development and environmental protection issues.

The History of Cooperation

The Arctic Council was established in 1996 by eight Arctic nations to enhance cooperation on Arctic issues.

The Arctic Environmental Protection Strategy was the starting point for the creation of working groups and inclusion of permanent participants.

There is a tendency to mythologize the Arctic Council as a normative good, but it's important to take a longer-term view of Arctic cooperation.

The Limitations of the Arctic Council

The Arctic Council's mandate explicitly excludes military and security issues.

With Russia being disengaged from the Arctic Council, there are concerns about its continuation and regional stability.

Some experts view the Arctic Council as one piece of a vast High North governance structure rather than the end-all or be-all.

The Evolution of the Arctic Council

In this section, the speaker discusses the evolution of the Arctic Council and its significance in recognizing the rights of indigenous people.

Recognition of Indigenous Rights

The Arctic Council is significant in recognizing the rights of indigenous people.

Mary Simon, Franklin Griffis, and other notaries from the Arctic were involved in creating elements of the council.

The council has been effective in bringing together indigenous communities and giving them standing.

Political Shifts

From 1989 to 1996, the council was finding its footing and leading climate change research.

From 1996 to 2008, political elites began to recognize its importance.

In 2014, Canada attempted to restrain Russia's behavior but failed when other countries disagreed.

Uncertain Future

The future of the Arctic Council depends on how Russia behaves.

It is uncertain whether or not retaining it as it currently exists is necessary.

Despite skepticism during Russia's transition out of chairing the organization, it was a smooth process.

Legal Agreements for Arctic Activities

The speaker suggests creating legally binding agreements to regulate art activities, similar to the Polar Code Arctic Fisheries agreements and the Arctic Coast Guard Forum. This would provide issue-specific opportunities that mitigate nation-centric insecurities.

The goal is cooperation among states, private sector, and others around a value system that makes sense.

The indigenous peoples from all countries and regions had a seat at the table in the Arctic Council framework.

Communities on the ground should have representatives at the table participating in working groups.

Cooperation is key, not security arrangements or competition.

There's a structure in place with great principles; continue working groups where Russia is not part of it.

Ad Hoc Organizations for Specific Issues

The speaker recommends inviting the European Union to be a full partner in ad hoc organizations around specific issues. Continue increasing science and funding on an issue-by-issue basis ad hoc.

Continue all work even if Russia reforms itself or create another new structure but keep up that principle.

Recognition and engagement of indigenous voices should continue in ad hoc cooperative alternatives to the council.

Unique Nature of Arctic Council

The speakers discuss how unique the Arctic Council is as a common theater for Arctic nations who have common values and norms within governance of specific issues.

It brings up whether there's really a need for a council if Russia isn't in it.

Moscow is diversifying its partnership in the region, reaching out to China and India who have already published Arctic policies and are observer states in the Arctic Council.

With more participants in the area, there is a likelihood for the region to become an international sphere of problems.

Enforcement of Intergovernmental Treaties and Agreements

The enforcement of intergovernmental treaties and agreements is not the responsibility of the Arctic Council. Rather, it is up to the various partners who sign the agreement to enforce it. This can be seen as a problem or an opportunity, depending on how one views it.

Enforcement and NATO's Role

The Arctic Council does not have to enforce anything against Russia, which could be seen as an advantage.

It is unclear whether all NATO partners would agree with broadening NATO's remit to include the Arctic.

The Arctic Council has a functionalist history in addressing specific issue areas such as search and rescue, oil spills, and environmental protection.

Due to climate change, there is a need for the Arctic Council to deal with specific issues while staying away from hard security issues.

Non-Arctic Countries' Interests

Some countries have specific interests in resources and shipping in the Arctic region.

Other countries join because they want to show that they are international players or middle powers.

It is important to differentiate between countries that have a genuine interest in the Arctic versus those jumping onto the bandwagon of its importance.

Shared Values and Norms Among Arctic Council Members

The founding members of the Arctic Council did not necessarily share common values and norms. They shared common interests due to their geographical location. However, through exchange and learning within the organization over time, shared values and norms developed.

Development of Shared Values

Common interests and geography brought the Arctic Council members together in 1996.

The organization provided opportunities for exchange and learning, which helped to develop shared values and norms over time.

Conclusion

The panelists discuss the governance structure of the Arctic, including the role of the Arctic Council and non-Arctic countries' interests. They also touch on the development of shared values among Arctic Council members.

Final Thoughts

Rob leaves due to another commitment, thanking Andrew, Petra, and Thomas for a fascinating discussion.

The panelists answer an audience question about the governance structure of the Arctic.

The Impact of Greenland's Independence on the Arctic

In this section, the panelists discuss how Greenland's independence could affect the governance structure of the Arctic.

Possible Impact on Arctic Governance

If Greenland becomes an independent country, it could be easily accommodated into existing Arctic discussions and frameworks.

There is already a lot of de facto cooperation that goes on every day in the Arctic.

There are many possible developments that could prove to be highly challenging, but there is also a lot of common interest in search and rescue, indigenous issues, self-government, and other areas.

Challenges and Opportunities

The impact of Greenland's independence would depend on what it looks like and its relation vis-a-vis NATO.

Chinese investment in mining and oil and gas could create challenges for collaboration with Canada.

However, there could also be interesting opportunities for collaboration between Canadian and Chinese companies in mineral exploration.

Conclusion

The panelists thank each other for their insights and opinions on one of the key issues facing Canadian politics.