Rethinking Foreign Policy

Canada needs to consider much more than just the melting ice and dying polar bears.

The experience of Jupi Nakoolak, the seventeen-year old Inuit teen recently rescued from a floating ice chunk in the Arctic after three days battling hypothermia, starvation, and polar bears put the spotlight on the Canadian Arctic. Stories like Mr. Nakoolak's remind us that Canada is very much a northern country, with important interests and responsibilities far beyond the 49th parallel we share with our southern neighbour. It also reminds us to pay attention to the fact that we're not alone on top of the world.

Why worry about four million square kilometres of solid ice? Well, first of all, if the scientific reports are true, the ice is melting – and it's melting faster than anyone thought possible. As the ice melts, it's pretty easy to see that Canada will increasingly find itself in the middle of a set of complex cross-cutting foreign policy issues and demands we can't ignore.

Changes in the earth's climate, global demand for energy, and security/defence issues, are all increasingly tied up in the Arctic sovereignty debate. Russia, the United States, Denmark, Finland, Sweden, Iceland, Norway, and Canada all border the Arctic and, now that the ice is melting, they are all rushing to establish the legitimacy of respective claims to larger pieces of the continental shelf (under the UN's Law of the Sea – UNCLOS). Then there's the Inuit of Canada and the Sami of Russia, circumpolar inhabitants who live on Arctic lands, and who have their own legitimate claims to be considered.

Also, let's not forget that oil is known to be plentiful under the Arctic ice; as the ice melts, the oil will become more accessible, and the likes of Shell, BP, and other resource companies will increasingly look to Canada as an energy heavyweight.

And these are not the only stakeholders. Environmental, conservation, and wildlife NGOs, and non-Arctic states in the European community – they all want their voices heard as the Arctic “opens up” to the world; they see a global, moral imperative to effectively manage this environmental transition and all of the geopolitical consequences it entails.

Resources, energy, environment, defence and security, and indigenous peoples – these all coalesce in the big foreign policy cauldron that is the Arctic. It's enough to make Ottawa bureaucrats and politicians pray for another Ice Age. Even that would be better than having to solve the Rubik's cube of policy challenges necessary to develop a coherent governance framework for the Arctic.

The task is difficult, but necessary. We can't wait for other countries to move before us. To drive this process, Canada should clearly define and assert its national interests in the Arctic as part of its foreign policy agenda. We must send a message to our neighbours, and shape the debates on development in the region. In the current context, we have an opportunity to stand out as an Arctic leader, to truly embrace our “True North strong and free” credo.

The current federal government's northern strategy is commendable for its on-the-ground commitment to developing a presence in the Arctic through infrastructure development, Canadian Armed Forces surveillance, scientific studies, and community development. But, according to leading Canadian Arctic experts, our current policy is overly piecemeal and ultimately inadequate, lacking as it does an overarching vision of the Arctic as an integral part of Canada's foreign policy. They trumpet the need for an integrated foreign policy for the North, one that includes a governance structure that would successfully balance, or at least give consideration to the many intersecting interests.

Nobody wants to see a free-for-all in the Arctic (i.e. unbridled development, decimation of local communities, environmental destruction). Obviously, Canada can't simply shut its Arctic gates to other countries and actors in the region, in the hope that all will be well. Our interests are intricately tied to geo-political realities, and would end up being dictated to us by the action of others if we failed to foster a dialogue. Instead, we should take a lead in engaging with key Arctic players to ensure a balance of broader social, economic, and environmental concerns with geo-political realities. Economic development – sure, but only if it's sustainable.

What's needed? Restrictions or bans on industrial fishing to mitigate the ecological effects of overfishing (how many fish stocks do we have to eliminate before we get the point?). Governance structures set up to respect Inuit interests, aspirations, and desires for control over local development (province-hood for Nunavut?). Restoring the Office of the Arctic Ambassador, disbanded between 2007 and 2009. All of these are important gestures that could help establish us as a leader among Arctic neighbours.

But for the melting ice, and the stories of stranded Inuit hunters and dying polar bears, nobody in Canada would really be taking notice of our northern territories, or the complexity of the issues we face there. Nonetheless, I'd like to believe that Canadians have a romantic enough attachment to the Arctic to want to pay more attention. So we should.

When I first read of Jupi Nakoolak's experience on the ice chunk, I thought about how powerless he must have felt as he floated aimlessly 34 kilometres off course for three days, wondering if he'd survive. It's this same sense of powerlessness that Canada must now avoid in the Arctic. We need to stand up and be noticed in a region that holds a multitude of strategic interests for our country, and can be used as a key leverage point for Canada to assert itself on the global stage. Let's not miss the opportunity.