Defending Canadian Arctic Sovereignty

[Kirkhill]

Good catches Mark. 

This quote from the Edmonton Journal needs highlighting.

"I thought this area was not busy, but I was wrong. We saw ships every day," said Ranger Master-Cpl. Norman Simeonie, an Inuk from Pond Inlet who was stationed on uninhabited Devon Island.

 

[geo]

would appear that they have grounded an Otter in soft ground at Pond Inlet.  Some suggestions that they might have to wait till freeze-up to fly it out.

 

[cp140tech]

  I just spent a short 5 days up there in support of the CP 140.  That was my first time up north and it was a real treat, hopefully this increased presence up there continues, I'd love to go back.  I heard about the Otter while we were up there, good luck to them.

 

[geo]

hehe.... break out the fishing rods and fire up the coleman stoves.........

 

[warspite]

I rember reading that in ten years the northwest passage through the arctic will be economically viable for commercial use.  Further more the route will be significantly shorter to travel (from Europe to china) than via the panama canal.  Canada does have to protect this unbelievable asset for itself. How? I don't know but it has to be done or we will have it taken from us. Remember Brittian, spain etc, spent years and years and lots of cash trying to find the northwest passage.  Canada just has to wait and seize this oppertunity for itself

 

[Colin Parkinson]

I suspect that being posted up there will be better than some of those Islets that are being disputed in Asia that have garrisons despite the fact that the island is only around 10m wide.

 

[d-fi]

Some more recent information from the United States about the Northwest Passage and the sovernty issues associated with it.

Washington Post Link,

The link above also contains a interesting video of scientists aboard the Canadian Coast Guard icebreaker Amundsen. The scientists discuss the effect that global warming has had on the legendary Northwest Passage.

Dispute Over NW Passage Revived
U.S. Asserts Free Use by All Ships; Canada Claims Jurisdiction

By Doug Struck
Washington Post Foreign Service
Monday, November 6, 2006; A18

TORONTO -- A long-standing legal wrangle between the United States and Canada could complicate future shipping through the Arctic as global warming melts the ice in the Northwest Passage.

The United States contends that the Northwest Passage, though owned by Canada, is an international strait with free passage for all, like other straits around the world. U.S. officials say they are following a long-standing position in favor of keeping straits free to all navigation and want unimpeded movement of U.S. ships.

Canada counters that it has sole jurisdiction over the Northwest Passage and wants to enforce its own laws on ships in the Arctic waters. Canadian officials argue that their authority over the myriad channels and straits that make up the legendary route from the Atlantic to the Pacific is the best way to minimize unsafe ships and accidental spills in the pristine North.

The issue has suddenly come alive because climate change is reducing the Arctic ice pack that prevents regular shipping through the passage.

In an unusual twist last week, the former U.S. ambassador to Canada, Paul Cellucci, was quoted in Canadian newspapers as saying that he agreed with the Canadian position. "It is in the security interests of the United States that it be under the control of Canada," he said at a conference in Ottawa.

Cellucci's comments prompted the current U.S. ambassador, David Wilkins, to restate U.S. insistence that the Northwest Passage is an international strait.

The spat has flared occasionally in the past. Canadians were incensed when Americans drove the reinforced oil tanker Manhattan through the Northwest Passage in 1969, followed by the icebreaker Polar Sea in 1985, both without asking for Canadian permission.

Usually, however, the two countries have ignored their differences, agreeing that icebreakers do not need permission to pass and refusing to acknowledge the regular traffic of undersea nuclear submarines that use the passage.

Michael Byers, an international law expert at the University of British Columbia, said that if foreign ships begin using the route, Canada will lose its claim of oversight.

Canada has no search-and-rescue helicopters regularly based in the north and has disbanded the one military unit capable of dropping onto the ice. The country has no submarine that can travel under the ice cap. Its icebreakers are old and considered mid-weight; they leave the Arctic for the winter. The government has promised to build three new, powerful icebreakers and a deep-water port at Iqaluit, the capital of the Canadian territory of Nunavut, but has failed to fund any of those projects.

"If a foreign vessel wanted to come through here right now, it could," Byers said. "It's a big welcome mat for all the fly-by-night companies."

edit: removed typo

 

[steveyb4342]

Why don't we just find homeless people that need a place to live and give them some warm clothes and build them a shack on all the little islands that need protection stand a 100ft flag pole up, raise a huge Canadian flag then train and supply the homeless with a .50cal? I think it's a great idea!  ;D It helps the homeless and it helps Canada, where could you go wrong?

                                                                          Steve 

 

[pjocsak]

Ex-Dragoon,

While rules regarding Archepelagic (sp?) waters may apply (and I personally believe that they should) there are also rules in international maritime law regarding straits. Under such laws no country may limit access to a strait, ie., it's to be considered international waters. An example being the Straits of Malacca. Theoretically most if not all of the straits are in either Malaysian, Singaporean or Indonesian waters yet none of the countries can deny access to the Straits. (As far as sources go, I could look them up if anyone is particularly interested, they're on my bookshelf doing nothing more usefull than collecting dust right now)

Now, if a country such as the US were to consider the Northwest Passage as a strait (albeit a very long one, or perhaps a series of interconnected straits) they might be able to make a challenge to our claims of ownership. Admittedly this wouldn't apply to all of the artic waters, but primarily those associated with the passage.

P

 

[Ex-Dragoon]

Why don't we just find homeless people that need a place to live and give them some warm clothes and build them a shack on all the little islands that need protection stand a 100ft flag pole up, raise a huge Canadian flag then train and supply the homeless with a .50cal? I think it's a great idea!  ;D It helps the homeless and it helps Canada, where could you go wrong?

                                                                          Steve 

If you don't have anything of value to add then don't add anything....

 

[T.R.Hayward]

Hello All,

I recently read that the Canadian Rangers were patrolling the northern coast, a soveriegnty patrol....

Best Wishes,

-Rick

(P.S. If there was adequate support, I'm sure that there would be ample volunteers to occupy Hans Island and other locations. At least in the summer months. I'd be willing to give it a go for a month or so....)

 

[TCBF]

We won't be taken seriously unless we spend money on this.

Phase 1: Punch a rail line from Churchill Manitoba to the Bellot Straight. Build a small base.

Phase II: Rail Bridge/ Causeway the Bellot Straight (two km)

Phase III:  Punch the railroad to the north coast of Somerset Island.  Build Main Arctic Base there.  Use it to Air and Ship (when able) our other Arctic Bases (such as on the straight between Devon Island and Baffin Island).  Defiles, anyone?

Go Big or Stay Home.

 

[GAP]

Do you really have any concept of the difficulty and cost of building a rail line across the tundra?  To do it to develop only a base, the economics do not support it.

Now if it could be tied into mining/development/non-government funding, it might be feasible.

 

[TCBF]

I know.  But the amount of undiscovered minerals - and oil - up there will make it worthwhile.

It's a big project, but we have to show the world we are serious.

Otherwise...

 

[stealthylizard]

Also to be taken into consideration, it is under First Nations legislation.  So they would have to be dealt with as well, making the cost unfeasible.

 

[TCBF]

Unless they WANT a rail line..

But, it would not be worthwhile.  The ground is just too rough.  Almost cheaper to tunnel!

A good gravel road, maybe.

 

[stealthylizard]

You also have to take into account of the freeze-thaw of the tundra.  Permafrost is starting to disappear adding more problems with maintenance, and infrastructure costs.

 

[MarkOttawa]

To repeat a comment at another topic--as for asserting sovereignty in Arctic waterways, an excellent article by a former CCG Deputy Commissioner (a brilliant public servant whom I knew):

A job for the Coast Guard
It's too bad that the Harper government's preoccupation with the military has caused it to overlook a more sensible solution to Arctic sovereignty
http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news/opinion/story.html?id=1c73cfd5-d71b-4b28-8670-43f374e8dc88

Mark
Ottawa

 

[TCBF]

By all means use the CCG.  Just remember that "torpedo', "gun", "sonar" and "sonobouy" are not in their vocabulary.  Now, considering what a platform has to be CAPABLE of doing to provide a credible deterent, where should the dollars go?

If towards CCG icebreakers, at least give them some sort of sonar capability. 

 

[Brockvegas]

If towards CCG icebreakers, at least give them some sort of sonar capability. 

I can just see the sonar operator on one of those now;
PING-- "Ice."
PING-- "Ice."
PING-- "Whale."
PING-- "Ice"
PING--"U-boat......hey wait a minute...."

;D