A Northern Foreign Policy for Canada

This is a condensed version of the report of the chairmen from the proceedings of a conference on "A Northern Foreign Policy for Canada," convened by The Canadian Polar Commission and the Canadian Centre for Global Security, in association with the Inuit Circumpolar Conference and the Canadian Arctic Resources Committee. The conference was held in Ottawa, April 29-30, 1994.

Why a Northern Foreign Policy for Canada?

The Arctic is emerging as a region in its own right, with its own unique problems and needs. Historically, responsibility for Canada' s Arctic foreign relations has been divided among various bureaus within the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. In most recent years, the Western European Bureau has been assigned the task of coordinating circumpolar matters. During the Cold War, when there was relatively little interaction among the countries of the region other than on defence, policy-makers in southern Canada generally regarded the Arctic as a subset of other Canadian foreign policy concerns. Today, that is no longer adequate. A northern foreign policy would help ensure that cooperative approaches are developed to encompass the problems and aspirations of northern Canadians.

The political map in the North is changing rapidly, both abroad and at home. Internationally, the chief political impediment to the expansion of circumpolar relations, the Cold War, has been removed. With the collapse of the Soviet Union, the way to closer relations with Canada' s largest Arctic neighbour, Russia, have been opened up. The evolution of a united Europe, possibly involving the Nordic neutrals and Norway, comprises a further major change in the regional context.

Domestically, the process of political devolution is accelerating, and territorial governments are increasingly involved in international activities. The establishment of Nunavut will take this trend further still. These political changes present Canada with both opportunities and problems which are best addressed in a focused, regional context.

The economic scene in the circumpolar North is also changing. Economic development and trade for the benefit of northerners have become a high priority for all northern peoples and their governments. Canada's territorial governments have been particularly active in their efforts to stimulate sustainable economic development in the North. Canada needs a northern foreign policy to give direction to its economic activities in the circumpolar North, to take advantage of the opportunities that are opening up there, and to ensure that economic development in the region benefits northerners.

As Canada endeavours to re-discover its national identity, its northern identity can act as an important unifying concept. Part of this entails building a new relationship between Canada' s northern Aboriginal peoples and the rest of Canada. The development of a northern foreign policy will be viewed by northern Canadians, and especially Aboriginal Canadians, as a genuine response to their interests. It will also strengthen national unity by elevating the profile of Canada's North among all Canadians. The potential of a northern foreign policy reflecting Canada' s northern identity, both symbolically and in reality, to serve the interests of Canadian national unity, has not been utilized nearly as effectively as it should.

A new international community is taking shape in the Arctic, reflected in the development of new institutions and processes such as the Arctic Council proposed by Canada, the Arctic Environmental Protection Strategy, the International Arctic Science Committee, the Northern Forum, the Inuit Circumpolar Conference, and the Aboriginal Leaders' Summit. To make effective use of these new processes and organizations, Canada must have a distinctive northern foreign policy that is an integral part of its overall international policies.

Finally, to continue in the way we have for the past 20 or 30 years is probably costing a great deal of money, in both lost resources and lost time. The uncoordinated, piecemeal approach Canada has tended to take to Arctic policy and operations has resulted in wasteful inefficiencies, an inability to join with our neighbours in many valuable cooperative enterprises, lack of information-sharing, and so on. Whether in scientific research or environmental protection, coordination of effort among the countries of the region will generate substantial savings. Further, a northern foreign policy will afford Canada opportunities to work more effectively with its circumpolar neighbours to develop cooperative approaches to economic development and employment in northern communities. In turn, this will make it easier to tackle in a cooperative, costsaving way the enormous social problems found in so many northern communities, not only in Canada but in other Arctic countries as well.

The Principles of a Northern Foreign Policy

Proceeding from these rationales, the conference affirmed four basic principles that should inform Canada' s northern foreign policy:

• first, relations among the Arctic countries must reflect a basic respect for the interests and aspirations of their northern residents, especially Aboriginal peoples;

• second, the policy-making process should involve the direct and active participation of northern Canadians from the beginning;

• third, development of the region must be consistent with principles of sustainability; and

• fourth, peaceful, civil relations among the countries of the region are best assured through the sharing of information and maintenance of mutual, cooperative security.

The Agenda for a Northern Foreign Policy

Mindful of these principles, the conference examined six specific areas deemed central to a Canadian foreign policy agenda for the circumpolar Arctic.

Economic Development and Trade

The first area considered was economic development and trade. The starting point for this discussion was a recognition that economic conditions in the North are grim. The region is suffering some of the highest unemployment rates in the country, with extremely serious social consequences. This places a high premium on seizing opportunities, such as those offered by circumpolar economic cooperation, to alleviate this grave situation.

Canada's northern Aboriginal leaders know that the majority of their people can't be hunters and trappers like their ancestors have been. With a young, growing population, they know they must reduce their dependency on Canadian taxpayers and, together with other northern Canadians, diversify their economy. The key to diversification, they recognize, is the development of the North' s resources, both renewable and non-renewable, following principles of sustainability, and effective marketing of these resources both within Canada and internationally.

Too often, however, policy initiatives, or specific economic undertakings have failed to benefit the North. One example is tourism. Today boatloads of tourists, often from the United States, Europe or the Far East, take excursions to northern Canada, but because of how these trips are organized, leave little more than refuse behind, and certainly no significant economic benefits are felt by northerners.

A northern foreign policy must aim at expanding joint management of resources by the countries of the Arctic, and stimulate circumpolar trade in ways that directly benefit northern Canadians. As John Amagoalik, Chief Commissioner of the Nunavut Implementation Commission, suggested, "The resource management regime now being instituted in Nunavut could perhaps be used as a model in other parts of the Arctic. Joint management by Arctic nations of such species as the narwhal, beluga and polar bear should be implemented by international treaties." That tourism has often failed to benefit northerners was seen as a challenge. It was recognized that tourism could, by the end of the century, be the largest industry in the North. Further, it was suggested that consideration be given to establishing free trade zones with Canada's Arctic neighbours. In all of this, the emphasis must be to ensure that economic development and circumpolar trade policies are designed to benefit northern Canadians directly.

A number of specific problem areas were identified on which concerted action by the Arctic countries is required, and in which joint efforts would pay substantial dividends. First, in regard to the fur industry, it was felt that circumpolar cooperation could be effective in countering the campaigns of animal rights movements, which have had such a devastating impact on the northern Canadian economy. Second, it was argued that the Government of Canada should seek changes in a number of international agreements, notably the Migratory Birds Convention Act and the Marine Mammal Protection Act, which were designed and necessary to protect valuable birds and sea mammals from destruction or extinction by unregulated commercial exploitation but which in their broad modern application have placed restrictions on aboriginal hunting and trade with no corresponding conservation benefit. Third, it was noted that northern fisheries, increasingly important to the North's economy, are coming under threat as fishing fleets move northward in response to the depletion of southern fishing grounds.

The Environment

A second critical focus for a northern foreign policy is the environment. It is, perhaps, trite to point out that the Arctic environment is sensitive and vulnerable to disturbance, perhaps uniquely so. The scale of the threat, however, has in recent years become increasingly alarming, and led to public demands for action. In a study of one Arctic community, mentioned by Dr. Andrew Gilman of Health Canada, scientists found concentrations of PCBs in the breast-milk of some Inuit women which were seven times higher than those of women living in southern Ontario. Up to 6 tonnes of PCBs enter the Canadian Arctic each year, compared to the 1.7 tonnes entering the Great Lakes.

The other principal focus concerns the nuclear legacy left in the Arctic by the former Soviet empire. It is generally believed that most of the major radioactive waste and obsolete missile dump sites will discharge radioactivity into the surrounding ground waters, streams or seas in the next few years. Even more worrisome is the fact that a large proportion of the reported six hundred nuclear power stations in Russia are on rivers draining into the Arctic Ocean, and most of these reactors are old, producing a large volume of 'hot' wastes.

Clearly, the volume of nuclear materials already dumped on land and offshore in the Eurasian sector of the Arctic is large, and a great deal more of these materials has yet to be disposed of. While the direct threat to Canada from the nuclear legacy in the eastern Europe and Russia is currently viewed as negligible, the circumpolar effects are potentially serious and require further study.

With its broad experience in nuclear matters, and with considerable expertise in monitoring and managing radioactive wastes in northern latitudes, Canada has a great deal to bring to the international effort to deal with this legacy.

The vast majority of this pollution of the Canadian North originates outside of Canada, and arrives via air currents and ocean currents, mainly from the former Soviet Union and from South Asia. While there may be taps in Canada that could still be turned another quarter-turn to reduce domestic sources of Arctic pollution, the pressing challenge is to conclude a LongRange Transport Protocol for persistent substances that have health impacts. It was felt that support for the U.N.' s efforts in this area must be a high priority of Canadian foreign policy. The future of the Arctic in terms of contaminants depends, to a great extent, on the success of that Protocol.

The key vehicle through which Arctic environmental questions are addressed is the Arctic Environmental Protection Strategy, which Canada had a large hand in establishing. It must continue to be a central element of Canada's northern foreign policy, including in relation to circumpolar cooperation on the Russian nuclear problem and other environmental problems in the circumpolar area. Conference participants welcomed DIAND Minister Ron Irwin's indication that Canada will host the next ministerial conference of the AEPS in 1995.

Science & Technology

A third focus of Canada's northern foreign policy must be science and technology, for it is through research that the circumpolar Arctic will come to be understood, and solutions to its problems developed. Indeed, it is also the case that Arctic research is critical to understanding threats to global survival, such as ozone depletion and global warming.

Canada, however, along with other countries, has been cutting back funding for Arctic research to the point where many important programmes are ceasing to be viable. This points to the importance of regional cooperation and costsharing.

A priority of Canada's Arctic foreign policy should be to assume a larger role in supporting Arctic science, including traditional indigenous knowledge, within Canada as well as through cooperative research programmes undertaken with Canada's circumpolar neighbours. This can pay dividends in environmental protection, in economic development and in many other areas.

In this connection, conference participants welcomed DIAND Minister Irwin' s statement that "cooperation in building our base of northern science and knowledge" is viewed by the government as an area where "an effective foreign policy can best support our domestic goals."

Maritime Issues

A fourth item on Canada's Arctic foreign policy agenda concerns maritime issues. Over the coming years, however, there is a very real prospect that there will be an expansion of Arctic shipping in the areas of northern supply, tourism, resource extraction, exploration, and scientific support.

In the past, Canada's approach to Arctic maritime issues has tended to be reactive, focused on responding to crises as they occurred. Priority has tended to be given not to long-term goals, but to policies that would deal with the problem immediately, that would appear to be forceful, that would appear to be economic, and that could be quickly implemented. The responses to the passages of both the Manhattan and the Polar Sea followed this pattern.

It was argued that now is the time for the Arctic countries, including Canada, to develop policies able to deal with an expansion of Arctic maritime shipping. Recognizing the value of unilateral regulations such as Canada' s Arctic Waters Pollution Prevention Act, it was felt that cooperative international action is also necessary, and that, among other possibilities, consideration should be given to designating the Arctic a special area under the Marpole Convention.

On another aspect of the transportation issue, a number of northern participants in the conference pointed out that, up to now, transportation routes in the North have been mostly north-south, and argued that the transportation system in the Arctic should be realigned to be more east-west.

It was suggested that Iqaluit be classified as a full-fledged international airport at some time in the future to facilitate travel around the circumpolar region and use the evolution in communications to advantage in overcoming the vast distances that must be covered in the Arctic region.

In November 1994, the Law of the Sea Convention will come into force. Canada has played a major role over the past three decades or so in bringing this Convention to fruition, and will, indeed, be responsible for the provisions connected with ice-covered waters. Conference participants believe strongly that this Convention must comprise a key component of Canada's policy toward the circumpolar Arctic.

In all of this, strong support was expressed for public involvement in the discussion of both the operational and technological aspects of these transportation issues, particularly Inuit involvement since Nunavut is likely to cover most of the Arctic shipping routes.

Finally, sovereignty was also a significant theme addressed at the conference. In this connection, Foreign Affairs Minister Andre Ouellet made the following comments:

The Canadian government is committed to maintaining our sovereignty in the Arctic. Of course, Canada has no intention of closing its Arctic waters, including the Northwest Passage, to other countries. However, we insist that any voyage be made with Canadian consent and be subject to Canadian law, particularly the Arctic Waters Pollution Prevention Act.

Security

In his presentation to the conference, defence analyst David Cox pointed out that both of the last two Canadian defence white papers, in 1971 and 1987, were published with covers featuring the Arctic, yet with content largely ignoring it. While emphasizing Canada's defence commitments to the NATO Alliance, they paid almost no attention to Arctic security. Why this discontinuity? he asked. What should Canada be doing to maintain Canadian security in the North in this post-Cold War period?

Reflecting the contentiousness defence issues often engender, two principal schools of thought emerged. One school of thought, broadly reflecting current official thinking, holds that little heed need be paid to Arctic security, that other problems such as Yugoslavia demand greater attention, and that NATO remains the appropriate institution for preserving security in the North.

The other school of thought regards the current climate of amity as an opportunity to put confidence- and security-building measures in place in the Arctic, as a hedge against any future decline in political relations, or the growth of instability in Russia. This perspective also noted that military activity in the Arctic is anything but over. In particular, the Arctic Ocean continues to be the site of underwater cat-and-mouse games between the nuclear submarines of the U.S. and Russian navies. A variety of confidence- and security-building measures for the Arctic were suggested.

These contending approaches merit greater attention than the conference was able to give them. While defence analysts argue over these alternatives, however, it must be said that the discussion made clear that northern Canadians do not favour, and do not support, the view that the status quo is good enough to ensure Arctic security. As John Amagoalik put it, "Some Arctic countries may not want to discuss security issues and military activity, but Arctic residents will insist that they be discussed. A circumpolar treaty for peace and security should be negotiated."

Both the Government of the Northwest Territories and the Inuit Circumpolar Conference, for instance, have prepared reports calling on Canada to adopt a circumpolar perspective to Arctic security, and seek ways to engender cooperation among the countries of the region.

At this conference, for instance, MLA Michael Ballantyne suggested that "a shift from war readiness to peace objectives could see an increased role for the military in search and rescue, logistic support for cooperative scientific initiatives, and response capabilities in the event of environmental disasters." So far, however, these calls for greater Arctic security cooperation have not been heard by Ottawa.

In this, and on such issues as low-level flying in Labrador, conference participants expressed a conviction that greater attention must be paid to the interests and perspectives of northern Canadians who, possessing little political clout, have nevertheless had to bear the impact of decisions taken for reasons of Canadian foreign and defence policy.

Finally, there was considerable support expressed for Canada to explore the possible role of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe (CSCE) in regard to Arctic security.

Culture

Lastly, support for cultural cooperation should be an element of Canada's northern foreign policy, just as it is part of Canadian policy toward La Francophonie and the Commonwealth. Over just a couple of generations, many of Canada's northern Aboriginal peoples have gone from living on the land, following subsistence lifestyles and speaking only their indigenous languages, to having land claims agreements, living in communities, being bombarded by southern mass media and culture, and having an education system based on southern curriculum.

In their struggle to cope with this rapid change while preserving their language and culture, Canada's Inuit have endeavoured to re-establish strong traditional ties and cooperation with Inuit living in other Arctic countries, particularly in Alaska, Greenland and Russia. Similarly, other northern indigenous groups in Canada have worked to cooperate internationally in support of their rights through such organizations as Indigenous Survival International. The survival of Aboriginal languages and cultures must be a concern for all Arctic nations, and that to this end, Canada should encourage and support cultural cooperation as part of its Arctic foreign policy.

Participants were encouraged by the words of Foreign Affairs Minister Andre Ouellet: "Canada's Arctic foreign policy must be premised not only on protecting the fragile environment, but also on preserving the traditional way of life of Aboriginal peoples. To do this, we must ensure that Aboriginal peoples have a direct role in decision making on the full range of Arctic issues."

Circumpolar cooperation in culture has additional dimensions, however, which should also be considered part of a northern foreign policy. Among the ideas that should be considered are a circumpolar education system, possibly including a university for Inuit from around the circumpolar North; and an expanded circumpolar media network to facilitate the sharing of cultural information among Arctic peoples.

Finally, a number of participants noted that, far from merely focusing on the preservation of Aboriginal cultures, a Canadian foreign policy should recognize and pursue opportunities to apply the lessons being learned in the North to situations elsewhere. As MLA Michael Ballantyne put it, "Northern Aboriginal peoples are world leaders in demonstrat

ing new models of government and self-determination. They provide the essential linkages among circumpolar nations. That must be recognized by national and sub-national governments."

Terry Fenge, Director of the Canadian Arctic Resources Committee, suggested that "it would be a valid foreign policy objective of our federal government to support directly Aboriginal peoples in northern Scandinavia and in the federation of Russia in their efforts to become more empowered through self-government arrangements." Franklyn Griffiths suggested yet another application:

Something original and beautiful is happening in Canada where Aboriginal peoples' recognition is concerned. Maybe we have something to give or show to the rest of the world here. Why should not Canada seek to have the Commonwealth become an instrument for Aboriginal peoples' rights, given that there are many Aboriginal peoples throughout the Commonwealth.

Multilateral Cooperation

In addition to considering the objectives of a northern foreign policy for Canada, the conference participants also focused on the means through which Canada's interests in the Arctic can most effectively be pursued. At the centre of Canada's strategy, it was concluded, must be the establishment of an international Arctic Council. This Canadian initiative received an overwhelming endorsement from conference participants.

A brief background note on the Arctic Council is warranted here. In 1991 the Canadian Government announced its intention to seek the support of its Arctic neighbours to establish a new body, called the Arctic Council, to help focus multilateral cooperation in the circumpolar North. Over the past three years, talks have proceeded slowly, achieving the support in principle of six of the other seven Arctic states, but held up by American reluctance to support the creation of a new multilateral body concerned with the North. Washington' s position has recently shifted somewhat, however, and Canada is now endeavouring to secure its support for the Council.

While the conference saw vigorous debate over the various approaches that might be taken to the Council, in particular whether or not it should be amalgamated with the Arctic Environmental Protection Strategy, there was a clear consensus that Canada should persist in its efforts to bring the initiative to fruition as soon as possible.

In this connection, conference participants were encouraged by Foreign Affairs Minister Ouellet' s statement that the government intends to "push forward the creation of an Arctic Council by the end of this year."

The message was clear that Canada should stick to its guns in support of the two principles it has sought from the beginning to have enshrined in the Council: first, that the Council must have an open agenda, that is, be mandated to tackle any and all issues agreed by its members; and second, that direct and effective participation by the Arctic' s Aboriginal peoples must be assured.

Conference participants were encouraged to learn that the Minister of Foreign Affairs raised the Council with U.S. Secretary of State Warren Christopher earlier this year. It was felt that the success of this initiative may well depend on making clear to the Americans at the most senior political level the importance Canada places on the establishment of an Arctic Council.

Canada's Bilateral Arctic Relationships

The conference also considered how bilateral relations with Canada' s circumpolar neighbours, including the United States, Russia and the Nordic countries, should be approached in the context of a northern foreign policy. The principal, and very widely supported, conclusion of this discussion was that Canada's northern foreign policy should emphasize relations with Russia, according this relationship a much higher priority in the overall scheme of Canadian foreign policy than it currently enjoys. The reason for this, apart from the fact that Russia is the largest Arctic state, is that it has a very great capacity to harm Canada's interests in the North, and a very great untapped potential to benefit those interests.

As was explained by government officials, Canada currently has a sizable programme of technical and humanitarian assistance for Russia. That programme, however, disperses Canada's assistance across virtually the entire former Soviet Union. It was felt that Canada should seriously consider refocusing its programme to concentrate on the Russian North. Instead of being a small fish in a big pond, Canada would become a big fish in a smaller pond. In this way, the political, and eventually the commercial, benefit to Canada would be maximized.

It was noted that Canadian-Russian Arctic relations have been passing through a period of stagnation in recent years, in part caused by political and economic turmoil in Russia, in part by tight budgets in Canada. Participants expressed the hope that under the Canada-Russia Joint Commission on Arctic Cooperation, this hiatus will soon end, and that the visits to Russia planned for later this year by both Minister Ouellet and Minister Irwin will help move this process forward.

American policy toward the Arctic has, of course, long centered on geostrategic considerations relating to the Cold War standoff with the Soviet Union. As a result, CanadianAmerican Arctic relations have been heavily focused on military issues, particularly through NORAD. Beyond this there have been various transboundary issues between Yukon and Alaska, and issues relating to multilateral cooperation on science and the environment.

With the ending of the Cold War, the United States began to revisit its Arctic policies, and, indeed, just recently completed a formal interagency review. That review indicates a greater American openness to Canada' s positions on a variety of issues, particularly in the environmental field.

While this is positive from a Canadian perspective, it also points to the need for Canada to be prepared, more prepared than it has been, to press its case effectively on such issues as the protection of the 1002 lands on the Alaska-Yukon boundary, modification of the Migratory Birds Convention, the Pacific fishery, and so on. In regard to the Arctic Council initiative, which the United States has resisted, Whit Fraser suggested that Canada continue to develop and utilize established Alaskan connections in order to stimulate American support. This could be pursued through the Inuit Circumpolar

Conference, through the Northern Forum, through the Government of the Northwest Territories and Yukon, and through the Council for Yukon Indians and the Yukon Conservation Society.

Among all of the bilateral Canadian-American issues that were considered, it was the resource and land use issues in the Porcupine caribou region that received the greatest attention. Support was expressed for twinning the dedicated areas on either side of the U.S.-Canadian border there to ensure proper environment management, possibly under a UNESCO world heritage designation. Conference participants were encouraged by the following statement by Foreign Minister Ouellet: "I believe we must move quickly with the Americans to formalize arrangements for preserving this herd and the surrounding wilderness."

Above all, it was argued that time is of the essence in terms of forwarding Canadian interests and views to the United States government. With its inter-agency review of Arctic policy now complete, it seems likely that the government and Congress will move quite quickly on a number of fronts, and Canada should make its views known clearly and forcibly as soon as possible.

In Canadian-Nordic relations there is a fundamentally solid set of relations upon which Canada can continue to build. A caution was issued, however, that the positive relations between Canada and the Nordic countries should not be taken for granted. Circumstances do change and these connections will have to be monitored. Three of the Nordic countries are poised to join the European Union at the end of this year, moving them into a more Eurocentric orientation. Unless Canada makes special efforts, this could weaken its traditional relations with them. More positively, if Canada can maintain its close relations with the Nordics, their membership in the European Union could help Canada increase the concern in the European community for Arctic pollution.

It was noted that the Nordic Council has established a Standing Committee of Parliamentarians for the Arctic Region, and that in 1993 Canada signed this declaration. As of yet, however, Canada has not nominated a representative to this Committee, nor set up the necessary support structure in the Canadian Parliament. Conference participants felt that these steps should be taken as soon as possible, so that Canada can begin participating in this important new body.

Finally, it was suggested that, in the context of a northern foreign policy, Canada's relations with Greenland should be expanded, based on geographic proximity, but also on the linkages with the Inuit people of Greenland. Cooperation between Canada and Greenland grew considerably in the 1970s to the mid-80s during the period of oil exploration in the Baffin Bay area, but more recently has waned somewhat. A renewal of that activity seems to be on the horizon again, but it is now accompanied by issues relating to the fishery and the tourist industry, and a basic thing like the need for better postal service between Iqaluit and Nuuk.

Whit Fraser is Chairman of The Canadian Polar Commission.

John Harker is the former Chairman of The Canadian Centre for Global Security.