Canada's Arctic policy

113 Pages·2014·6.36 MB·English

Faculty of Humanities, Social Sciences and Education,
!
Department of Sociology, Political Science and Community Planning

!
!
Canada’s Arctic policy
Striking a balance between national interests and
circumpolar cooperation
Beate Steinveg
STV-3900 – Master thesis in Political Science
November 2014

Acknowledgements
Working on this master thesis has been an interesting and enjoyable year for me, however, it
hasalsobeenaprocessIcouldnothaveaccomplishedalone.
Firstandforemost,IwouldliketothankmypositiveandencouragingsupervisorattheUniver-
sity, Professor Knut Mikalsen. Your guidance and our conversations have been much appreci-
ated,andknowingIwouldalwaysreturnfromourmeetingswithanewspirithasbeenessential
formethroughoutthisyear. Icouldnothaveaskedforabettermentor.
Professor Jarle Aarbakke, thank you for your advice and perspectives at the beginning of this
project. Steffen,youhavebeenthebossoftheyear,andIstilloweyouthatdiploma.
Lastly, I would like to especially thank Andreas. Thank you for your contributions and com-
ments on my thesis. Thank you for always believing in, pushing and challenging me. You are
mybestfriendandIcancountonyounomatterwhat. Forthat,Iamforevergrateful.
BeateSteinveg
Tromsø,November2014

Contents
1 INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND 1
1.1 Research objective and problem statement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.1.1 Researchobjective . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.1.2 Problemstatementandresearchquestions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.1.3 Theoreticalfoundationandjustificationfortheproblemstatement . . . 2
1.1.4 Contributions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.2 Canada’s territorial north . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.3 Historical background: Developments in Canada’s Arctic approach 4
1.3.1 TheHarpergovernment’sArcticapproach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
1.4 Arenas for Arctic policymaking and cooperation . . . . . . . . . . . 7
1.4.1 TheArcticCouncil . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
1.4.2 TheArcticFive . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
1.5 Structure of the thesis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
2 THEORY 12
2.1 Theoretical approaches to international relations . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
2.2 Neoliberal Institutionalism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
2.2.1 Coreassumptions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
2.2.2 Cooperationandinstitutions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
2.3 Realism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
2.3.1 Coreassumptions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
2.3.2 Cooperationandinstitutions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
2.4 Applying the theoretical framework to Canada’s Arctic policy . . 16
3 METHODOLOGYANDDATA 18
3.1 Qualitativeresearchdesignandcasestudy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
3.1.1 Caseselection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
3.2 Datacollection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
3.2.1 Challengesrelatedtoattainingdatamaterialformythesis . . . . . . . 21
3.2.2 Documentanalysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
3.2.3 Literaturereview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
3.2.4 Semi-structuredinterview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
3.3 Researchquality: strengthsandweaknessesofmydata . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
3.4 Ethnicalconsiderations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
4 THE ARCTIC: POLITICAL CONTEXT AND SALIENT STAKE-
HOLDERS 26
4.1 TheUnitedNationsConventionontheLawoftheSea(UNCLOS) . . . . . . . 26
4.1.1 Canada’sArcticsovereigntyandcontinentalshelfsubmission . . . . . 28
4.2 ArcticPoliciesofcentralstakeholdersintheregion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
4.2.1 TheUnitedStates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
4.2.2 TheRussianFederation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
4.2.3 Norway . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
4.2.4 Denmark . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
4.2.5 Sweden . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
4.2.6 Finland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
4.2.7 Iceland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
4.2.8 TheArcticCouncilversustheArcticFive . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
4.3 ’Stateofthenation’intheArctic-cooperationorconflict? . . . . . . . . . . . 42
5 CANADA’SARCTICPOLICY: THEMESANDSTRATEGIES 45
5.1 Canada’sNorthernStrategy(2009)andAchievementsunderCanada’s
Northern Strategy, 2007-2011 (2011) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
5.2 StatementonCanada’sArcticForeignPolicy(2010) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
5.3 CanadaFirstDefenseStrategy(2008) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
5.4 Canada’s Economic Action Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
6 THECANADIANARCTICCOUNCILCHAIRMANSHIP,2013-2015 56
6.1 Fromtransnationalforumtointernationalorganization . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
6.2 TheCanadianArcticCouncilchairmanshipprogram2013-2015 . . . . . . . . 60
6.2.1 IssueareashighlightedthroughtheCanadianArcticCouncilchairmanship 61
6.2.2 MotivesbehindCanadianpolicyinitiativesintheArcticCouncil . . . . 62
6.2.3 ComparisonoftheArcticCouncilprogramandCanada’sNorthernStrat-
egy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
6.3 CanadianinfluenceontheArcticagendathroughtheArcticCouncil . . . . . . 65
6.4 TheArcticCouncil’ssignificanceforCanadianArcticpolicymaking . . . . . . 67
7 GOVERNANCEINCANADA’SNORTHERNTERRITORIESANDINDIGENOUS
PEOPLES 69
7.1 Canada’snorthernterritoriesandAboriginalpeoples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
7.2 ThehistoryofterritorialgovernanceinCanada . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71
7.3 ThedevolutionprocessinCanada’snorthernterritories . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72
7.3.1 Accomplishmentsthroughthedevolutionprocess . . . . . . . . . . . . 72
7.3.2 RemainingchallengesinCanada’snorthernterritories . . . . . . . . . 74
7.4 NorthernersinCanadiangovernmentaldocuments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77
7.4.1 NorthernersinCanada’sNorthernStrategy(2009) . . . . . . . . . . . 77
7.4.2 TheHarperGovernment’sSpeechfromtheThrone,October2013 . . . 78
7.5 Indigenouspeoplesinternationally . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80
8 ANALYSISANDCONCLUSION 82
8.1 Analysisoftheresearchquestions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82
8.1.1 MotivesforanddrivingforcesbehindCanada’sArcticpolicymaking . 82
8.1.2 Canada’sactionstopositionitselfintheHighNorth . . . . . . . . . . 85
8.1.3 ThebroaderimplicationsofCanadianArcticpolicymaking . . . . . . . 87
8.2 Problemstatementandconcludingremarks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89
8.3 Areasforfurtherresearch . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93
Bibliography

Chapter 1
INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND
What is fascinating about the Arctic region1 is that despite its remoteness, sparse population
and hostile climate, it is still of high interest and relevance in contemporary politics. From an
environmental perspective, it is by now well documented that the polar areas are deeply inter-
connectedwiththerestoftheworld. Thisisalarminglydemonstratedbytheimpactsofclimate
change, and most Arctic states recognize the need for cooperative actions to deal with these
challenges. Politically, even though there seems to be a general agreement that the likelihood
of a “new Cold War” in the Arctic is scant, the Arctic states, as well as non-Arctic states and
actors, are paying close attention to the region and what others are doing in terms of estab-
lishingapresence,resourcedevelopment,capacitybuildingandmilitaryactivities. Inaddition,
there have been recent examples of spillover from conflicts elsewhere in the world affecting
Arctic cooperation and circumpolar relations. Such realities have also gained increased media
attention,andasaresult,Arcticissuesarerisingonthepoliticalaswellasthepublicagenda.
Canadaistheworld’ssecondlargestcountryafterRussia,over40%(3.4millionkm²)of
itslandmassislocatedintheArctic–includingthenorthernterritoriestheYukon,theNorthwest
Territories and Nunavut – and the Arctic coastline of 162,000 km constitutes almost 75% of
Canada’s total shoreline (Bonikowsky, 2012). Canada’s Arctic Foreign Policy (2010, 4) states:
“Given our extensive Arctic coastline, our Northern energy and natural resource potential, and
the40percentofourlandmasssituatedintheNorth,CanadaisanArcticpower”. Yet,upuntil
very recently, Canada’s knowledge about and presence in its northern region has been more
or less absent. Canada clearly needs to cooperate with other states to be able to respond to
the challenges and opportunities arising in the Arctic, in particular to manage both natural and
human resources in the region. The consequences of this reality are becoming evident, and the
Canadian government is working to advance its knowledge about the High North2, to position
itself in the region and increase control over its Arctic territories by asserting and exercising
sovereignty. When Conservative Prime Minister Stephen Harper took office in 2006, he made
theArcticacentralpartofhiselectoralplatformandhaslatermadeseveralpromisesregarding
theregion,whichwillbeexaminedthroughoutthisthesis.
1ThetermArcticwillbeusedtorefertothenorthernmostregionoftheworld,containingtheArcticOceanand
partsoftheeightArcticstates: Canada,theUnitedStates(Alaska),theRussianFederation,Norway,Denmark
(Greenland),Sweden,FinlandandIceland.
2An example is ”The State of Northern Knowledge in Canada” issued by the Canadian Polar Commission in
March2014.
1
1.1 Research objective and problem statement
1.1.1 Researchobjective
Firstly, I have chosen Canada’s Arctic policymaking and implementation as the object of study
for my thesis because the Canadian north is severely underdeveloped compared to the High
North of most of the other Arctic states, and I find it interesting that this otherwise well-
developed country face such vast challenges in its Arctic region. Secondly, the Arctic is an un-
predictableregioninwhichseveralstatesexpressambitionsforterritorialclaimsandsovereignty
expansions. In this regard, Canada has the potential to become an Arctic great power by virtue
of its landmass, coastline and resource potential in the region. This combination of Canada’s
prospect to become an Arctic great power with its underdeveloped northern territories allows
for an interesting case in terms of examining how Canada works domestically and maneuvers
on the international arena to meet these challenges while safeguarding national interests and
protectsitsArcticsovereignty. Tothisend,Canada’sactions,theintentionsandmotivesbehind
these actions, as well as the outcomes and effectsof Canadian Arctic policymaking are matters
of interest. I will examine the ‘new era of the Arctic’ and how Canada works to position itself
in this transforming region unilaterally, through bilateral relations with the other Arctic states
andthroughtransnationalcooperationinmultilateralforums,primarilytheArcticCouncil.
1.1.2 Problemstatementandresearchquestions
Theproblemstatementofthisthesisis:
WhatarethemainprioritiesforCanadainitsArcticregion,andhowdoesCanada
pursueitsArcticpolicyonthedomesticandinternationallevel?
Thefirstpartoftheproblemstatementleadstothequestion:
• Is Canada driven primarily by sovereignty and security motives, or by a genuine interest
incooperativestewardship?
Thesecondpartoftheproblemstatementderivestworesearchquestions:
• How does Canada work to position itself in its High North, both domestically and inter-
nationally,seeninlightoftherecentsparkofinterestinthecircumpolarregion?
• TowhatextentdoesCanada’sArcticpolicycontributetoinfluenceinternationalrelations
andshapetheinternationalArcticagenda?
1.1.3 Theoreticalfoundationandjustificationfortheproblemstatement
To structure the empirical findings and enable an analysis, a theoretical framework addressing
particularly international relations, the state and the role of international regimes is necessary.
2