(Re)Conceptualizing

(Re)Conceptualizing Arctic Security Selected Articles from the Journal of Military and Security Studies Edited by P. Whitney Lackenbauer, Rob Huebert, and Ryan Dean (Re)Conceptualizing Arctic Security Selected Articles from the Journal of Military and Strategic Studies Edited by P. Whitney Lackenbauer, Ryan Dean, and Rob Huebert © The authors/editors 2017 2500 University Dr. N.W. Calgary, AB T2N 1N4 Tel: 403.220.4030 www.cmss.ucalgary.ca LIBRARY AND ARCHIVES CANADA CATALOGUING IN PUBLICATION (Re)Conceptualizing Arctic Security / edited by P. Whitney Lackenbauer, Ryan Dean, and Rob Huebert. Issued in electronic and print formats ISBN: 978-0-88953-413-1 (pdf) 978-0-88953-414-8 (paperback) 1. Arctic regions--Strategic aspects. 2. Security, International -- Arctic regions. 3. Arctic regions -- Military policy. 4. Arctic regions -- Strategic aspects. 5. Arctic Sovereignty. 6. Canada. Canadian Armed Forces— Arctic. 7. Canada, Northern--Strategic aspects. I. Lackenbauer, P. Whitney, editor II. Dean, Ryan, editor III. Huebert, Rob, editor IV. Centre for Military, Security and Strategic Studies, issuing body IV. (Re)Conceptualizing Arctic Security. Page design and typesetting by P. Whitney Lackenbauer Cover design by P. Whitney Lackenbauer and Ryan Dean Please consider the environment before printing this e-book Table of Contents Introduction “An Important International Crossroads” by i P. Whitney Lackenbauer and Rob Huebert 1. Regional Cooperation and Conflict Introduction by Rob Huebert 1 1.1: David Rudd, “Northern Europe’s Arctic Defence 13 Agenda,” JMSS 12:3 (2010) 1.2: Frédéric Lasserre, Jérôme Le Roy, Richard Garon, “Is There an Arms Race in the Arctic?” JMSS 14: 3&4 41 (2012) 1.3: Paal Sigurd Hilde, “The “New” Arctic: the Military 97 Dimension,” JMSS 15:2 (2013) 2. Canadian Security Approaches Introduction by Ryan Dean 115 2.1: P. Whitney Lackenbauer, “The Military as Nation Builder: The Case of the Canadian North,” JMSS 15:1 126 (2013) 2.2: Paul Dittmann, “In Defence of Defence: Canadian 158 Arctic Sovereignty and Security,” JMSS 11:3 (2009) 2.3: P. Whitney Lackenbauer and Adam Lajeunesse, “The Canadian Armed Forces in the Arctic: Building 214 Appropriate Capabilities,” JMSS 16:4 (2016) 3. The Northwest Passage Introduction by P. Whitney Lackenbauer and Suzanne 275 Lalonde 3.1: Eric Wang, “The Role of Canadian Armed Forces in 287 Defending Sovereignty,” JMSS 11:3 (2009) 3.2: Andrea Charron, “The Northwest Passage Shipping Channel: Sovereignty First and Foremost and 303 Sovereignty to the side,” JMSS 7:4 (2005) 3.3: James Cotter, “Developing a Coherent Plan to Deal with Canada’s Conundrum in the Northwest Passage,” 325 JMSS 11:3 (2009) 4. Resource Security Introduction by Adam Lajeunesse 365 4.1: Peter F. Johnston, “Arctic Energy Resources and 374 Global Energy Security,” JMSS 12:2 (2010) 4.2: Bent Ole Gram Mortensen, “The Quest for Resources 393 –the Case of Greenland,” JMSS 15:2 (2013) 4.3: Nils Wang, “Arctic Security -An Equation with 420 Multiple Unknowns,” JMSS 15:2 (2013) 5. Non-Arctic States Introduction by P. Whitney Lackenbauer 435 5.1: Andreas Østhagen, “The European Union – An Arctic 451 Actor?” JMSS 15:2 (2013) 5.2: David Curtis Wright, “China's Growing Interest in the 468 Arctic,” JMSS 15:2 (2013) 5.3: Timothy Curtis Wright, “China’s New Arctic Strategem: A Strategic Buyer’s Approach to the 483 Arctic,” JMSS 15:1 (2013) Introduction i Introduction: “An Important International Crossroads” P. Whitney Lackenbauer and Rob Huebert It has become almost pro forma to begin any book on the twenty-first century Arctic with a description of a region in transformation. The narrative begins with global climate change and the melting of ice-covered Arctic waters. This dynamic, in turn, unlocks access to previously frozen natural resources and trans-Arctic sea routes, thus presenting emerging economic opportunities – and concomitant security and safety risks. Given that both Arctic and non-Arctic states have vested interests in resources and transit routes, the circumpolar world is becoming more “international” than ever before. Packaged together, the heightened public interest in Arctic issues (spurred by intensifying media coverage) goes hand-in-hand with rising political interest in the region to produce complex geostrategic dynamics that continue to generate significant international attention, discussion, and debate. Climate change is undoubtedly at the top of the list of transformational forces. Prior to the 1990s, few imagined the possibility of an Arctic Ocean without ice cover. By the early 2000s, however, it had become evident that the Arctic was not only being affected by worldwide temperature increases, it was the most dramatically affected area on earth. Congruent with the international cooperation then prevalent in the region, the Arctic Council organized an extensive multi-year, multinational, and multi-disciplinary study of the impacts of climate change.1 Although it found that nearly every aspect of the Arctic was affected by the rising temperatures, the melting of the permanent ice cover elicited the most interest— and concern. A quick canvassing of the titles of some of the key books to appear over the last decade provides insight into some of the dominant frames or tropes in regular circulation to describe the changing circumpolar North.2 Melting ice, climate change, and the opening of the Arctic are reflected in such titles as After the Ice: Life, Death, and Geopolitics in the New Arctic; Arctic Opening: Insecurity and ii (Re)Conceptualizing Arctic Security Opportunity; and Arctic Security in an Age of Climate Change.3 The so-called race or scramble for the Arctic is evident in The Scramble for the Arctic: Ownership, Exploitation and Conflict in the Far North, Scramble for the Poles, The Arctic Gold Rush: The New Race for Tomorrow’s Natural Resources, and others like them.4 Titles such as Polar Imperative, The Fast-Changing Arctic, and Cold Front: Conflict Ahead in Arctic Waters emphasize the rapidity of change and urgency for stakeholders to take action.5 The contested nature of ownership features in Who Owns the Arctic?,6 while the need to defend Arctic jurisdiction frames studies such as Arctic Front: Defending Canada in the Far North.7 Still others adopt the lens of Arctic exceptionalism, framing the circumpolar North as a zone of peace and a territory of dialogue that is largely insulated from global political dynamics and thus is best considered through the lenses of stable regional governance, functional cooperation, and peaceful co-existence.8 While the term Arctic seems to describe an obvious geographical location, closer scrutiny almost always muddles the definitions.9 There is no agreement as to the where the terrestrial and maritime boundaries of the Arctic region begin or end. Efforts have been made to use physical attributes such as average temperatures or treeline, but these have their limitations when applied to human habitation. Simply adopting the Arctic Circle (66° north) as the boundary leaves out areas such as Iceland.10 Politically, the Arctic region has tended to be a self-described region in which Russia, Canada, United States, Denmark, Iceland, Finland, Norway, and Iceland see themselves as Arctic states. In the case of the United States, however, only a small part can be credibly considered “Arctic.”11 The definition of the Arctic Ocean is only slightly better understood, although most commentators agree that it is semi-enclosed by the northern limits of the North American and Eurasian land masses and is centered on the North Pole. In most discussion regarding the Arctic Ocean its marginal seas12 normally include Baffin Bay, Barents Sea, Beaufort Sea, Chukchi Sea, East Siberian Sea, Greenland Sea, Hudson Bay, Hudson Strait, Kara Sea, Laptev Sea, White Sea.13 The Northwest Passage (NWP)14 and the Northeast Passage (also known as the Northern Sea Route or NSR)15 also figure predominately in any discussion of the maritime zones of the Arctic.16 Both Canada and Russia regard these are internal waters while other countries such as the United States see them as international straits, thus making their legal status contentious. Suffice to say that there is no universal definition of the Arctic or its boundaries. Canadian commentators have similarly grappled with trying to define the Canadian Arctic. The shorthand political definition of North of 60 usually refers to Introduction iii the three northern territories of Nunavut, Northwest Territories, and Yukon,17 but this leaves out significant parts of the provincial norths that either extend beyond the 60th parallel or have climatological, physiographical, or human characteristics that warrant their consideration as Arctic spaces. Canada’s 2017 defence policy, Strong, Secure, Engaged, describes that: Spanning three Territories and stretching as far as the North Pole, Canada’s North is a sprawling region, encompassing 75 percent of the country’s national coastlines and 40 percent of its total land mass. The sheer expanse of Canada’s North, coupled with its ice-filled seas, harsh climate, and more than 36,000 islands make for a challenging region to monitor – particularly as the North encompasses a significant portion of the air and maritime approaches to North America. Although Canada’s North is sparsely populated, the region is spotted with vibrant communities, many inhabited by Canada’s Indigenous populations. These communities form an integral part of Canada’s identity, and our history is intimately connected with the imagery and

Load more