Canadian Arctic Sovereignty
August 18, 2009 · By Charles Anthony
Harper is touring the Northern territories and giving the news media some fodder for a slow Summer. Here is what is commonly spouted by the mainstream media:
CTV’s Rosemary Thompson said the not-so-secret purpose behind Harper’s latest Arctic voyage is to show the world that Canada is serious about protecting its sovereignty.
“All this of course, is not just flag-waving, but to show Canadians and the world that Canada is an Arctic country,” she told CTV’s Canada AM from Iqaluit on Monday morning.
—SNIP
“The Americans are competing for part of this land, as are the Russians, the Danes and the Norwegians,” Thompson said.
I would like to hear somebody ask the Prime Minister (or any politician for that matter) simple economics question concerning this matter. Such as: “Who in their right mind would wrestle “control” over the arctic from Canadians? Taking control over the arctic would mean accepting the burden of subsidizing all of the industry and lifestyles of the people up there. Currently, in our global economy, the rest of the world gets to buy our resources at prices that are subsidized by Canadian tax-payers! Why, oh, why would any foreigner take that burden?!?”
Oh! I forgot! The global-warming-climate-change environmental hysteria card! We must defend our North because the polar ice caps are melting! Canadians will be drowning on the coasts and rushing up to the Northern territories for refuge. Silly me!
Despite what is on the line, Robert Huebert, the associate director of the Centre for Military and Strategic Studies at the University of Calgary, says Canada may be falling behind in its efforts to declare its sovereignty in the Arctic.
Hmm…. I have a hard time paying attention to the military-folk who need to defend their raison-d’etre in this global economy.
Who in their right mind would wrestle “control” over the arctic from Canadians?
You aren’t seriously this ignorant, right? There’s a treasure trove of resources up there, and assuming that your babble about “hysteria” is exactly that, there will be a gigantic amount of shipping up there, which means whoever controls that shipping lane gains a lot of power..
Honestly, you don’t even have to be Canadian to understand this stuff. It’s all on the DND website. Try doing a bit of research next time.
Canada is sea to sea to sea.The reason our govt and military wishes to maintain control of the north is protection of sovereign territory!
If we don’t use it, we lose it. Simple as that.
If you see this as a make work project for the military, perhaps you would like to see a foreign flag fly over the arctic? It could happen…
I agree somewhat with Demosthenes here Charles.
The opening of the Northwest Passage for commercial and private passage offers an invaluable opportunity for the Northern Territories to become far more self-sufficient through Tariffs and Tourism revenue, not to mention the private and public investments in infrastructure and services that come with such things.
And that is totally apart from the increase of access to (as Demosthenes says), the “treasure trove of resources up there”. Easier access makes it more feasible for industries to tap those resources. If there’s a business or industry that can and will be profitable, location will scarcely be an issue.
No, Mr. Demo, I am not ignorant. I just do not care who owns those resources. You might think the ownership matters. I do not.
Further, I do not like subsidizing Northern industries. You might enjoy that yourself but I do not. You might even feel entitled to my money so that you can subsidize Northern industries. Do you feel such entitlement?
One more thing: I am not impressed by the Department of National Defense telling us that we need their services. You might be convinced by their arguments but I expect no less from them. I mean, after all, how else are they going to stay employed?? Are you seriously that gullible?
If arctic resources are so unimportant, why not give away the Alberta oil sands also?
Related post at Dust my Broom:
‘What Stinkin’ “Arctic Sovereignty”?‘
Mark
Ottawa
I don’t think this is, or has ever been, a question of foreign devils conquering igloos and reigning over the Inuit.
It comes down to resources. The author may not be concerned with ownership of resources (which seems slightly askew), but that’s really what it comes down to.
There is a reason the Iraqi oil fields don’t have giant “help yourself” signs hanging off the refineries. Exploitable natural resources mean wealth and power.
As for ownership, right to property is a cornerstone of any capitalist economy. If there is some underlying sarcasm in the author’s comments, it’s lost on me.
Very interesting stuff none the less, thanks for the entry.
If only the right to property was universally respected. The sovereignty of the Arctic is defended by denying my right to property.
My taxes are my property and yet they are being confiscated against my will to defend the property (i.e., the “natural” resources) of somebody else.
I do not see the rich oil moguls handing me any money to subsidize the cost of defending my house.