Throughout the course of time, the question of ‘Who Owns the Arctic?’ has been one of great international dispute. In short, there isn’t a sole country that claims the Arctic and its resources for itself. The United States, Russia, Norway, Canada, and Denmark, or the five Arctic littoral powers, all own land in the Arctic and the resources that come with it. The Arctic has always been an area of contention, specifically during World War II and the Cold War. Global warming has melted away layers of ice that have made valuable resources inaccessible and sea routes too dangerous to sail. Because of this, the littoral powers are expressing even more interest in the Arctic. China is also getting involved in the Arctic resource grab. The Arctic littoral …show more content…
40% of Canadian territory is in the Arctic and it is home to over 120,000 Canadians, more than half of which are indigenous . Britain gave Canada its land in the Arctic in 1880, but it did not become part of Canadian territory until 1895 . Canada’s first real assertion of sovereignty was in 1903 when the North West Mounted Police built a post office on Herschel Island . Because of US exploration in the Arctic in the 1910s to 1925, Canada passed a law that gave them sovereignty their part of the Arctic . Many Canadians were upset with the government because of the American presence in an underdeveloped, unpopulated Canadian Arctic territory during the Cold War because of the US building the DEW line . Canada and Denmark have been engaging in a friendly political dispute over Hans Island, which is a small, barren, uninhabited island in the Arctic . They have continuously gone back and forth placing their flags, with Denmark leaving a bottle of brandy and Canada leaving a bottle of whiskey and on the territory each time a representative visits. There has never been a settlement reached on who really owns Hans Island, so the Whiskey War continues. In 1996, Canada passed the Ottawa Declaration because of growing expectation for a new public health movement. One of the key aspects of the Ottawa Declaration was the development of the Arctic Council . The Arctic Council is a government organization that …show more content…
Greenland is a territory of Denmark. It gives Denmark the opportunity to build relations with many global superpowers, including Russia and the United States . The US built an air base in Thule during the Cold War, thus proving Greenland’s geopolitical importance. When Russia planted the flag on the floor of the Arctic in 2007, Denmark, Norway, the US, Canada, and Russia met to discuss territory. The Illulissat Declaration was passed by Denmark and adapted by the other countries who attending the meeting. It stated that “the nations committed themselves to peaceful cooperation and dialogue regarding the development in the Arctic Ocean, and to settle possible overlapping territorial claims or other discrepancies within the framework of international law and the Law of the Sea.” . In 2011, Denmark released their Arctic Strategy. Their main objectives are social development and sustainability and to prevent the militarization of the Arctic . China’s development of ice-friendly planes, helicopters, and an icebreaker known as Xuelong, or Snow Dragon, has made Denmark nervous because it gives them reason to believe that China is going to militarize the Arctic. Denmark also plans to expand their military base in Thule and create an Arctic Response Force, which would be created from existing forces and used in an emergency
Members of the Canadian government and the Indigenous people signed Treaty 6 in 1876. Treaty 6 was “a formal and binding contract between two nations” that would help deal with important matters. Treaty negotiations included land, education, healthcare, government funding, and more. The treaty was created to help benefit both parties – the Canadian government, and the Indigenous people. However, the Canadian government broke this treaty many times. In the mid 1880’s there w...
A complex collection of more than 1800 separate islands forms the Canadian Archipelago and Canada’s Arctic territory. 1 Within recent history the arctic has gained popular attention from governments both domestically and internationally. The rise in global climate temperatures accounts for longer, ice free Arctic summers, higher levels of resource exploration and development, and less challenges to access in the Arctic. Canadian sovereignty over Arctic lands and islands is undisputed with the single exception of Hans Island, a 1.3 square kilometer island claimed by Denmark.2 Currently what is disputed is the Canadian assertion of sovereignty over the Northwest Passage waterway. The passage which would facilitate international shipping through the sovereign Canadian archipelago island system, links the Atlantic Ocean with the Pacific Ocean. Its widest and deepest course would take the Northwest passage from “Lancaster Sound through Barrow Straight into Viscount Melville Sound an onwards through M’Clure Straight and into the Beaufort Sea.”3 Historically Arctic ice made this route impossible to cross, but rising temperatures are changing that. The government of Canada believes that the Northwest Passage is situated within internal Canadian waterers, thereby falling under Canadian sovereign jurisdiction, subject to Canadian domestic laws. With the possibility of the passage becoming a international shipping rout, many countries including the United States do not agree with this claim. They suggest the Northwest passage should be an international straight subject to the International Law and the doctrine of transit passage.4
Although industrialization revolutionizes America, it possesses devastating effects on nature. In 2003, The Arctic National Wildlife Refuge was threatened by plans of oil drilling and the construction of roads and pipelines. In response, former United States President Jimmy Carter crafted a speech, found in the foreword to book written by Subhankar Banerjee, with the intent of protecting the reserve. By utilizing diction, imagery and pathos, President Carter was effective in convincing America to protect the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.
The Arctic region is home to a variety of valuable animals and plants, including polar bear, seal, and so on. The ecosystem of the Arctic region is fragile because these animals are evolved to live in extreme conditions. With the climate change, many animals are endangered. Ice is the habitat of polar animals because they have to rely on sea ices for resting, food, and reproduction. With the climate change and the decrease of sea ice, the number of polar animals is decreasing and their health is threatened. For example, the average weight of female polar bears in 1980 was about 650 pounds, but the number reduced to about 500 pounds in 2004 (Djoghlaf 15). The earlier breakup and later condensation of sea ice shortens the hunting season of polar bears. Polar bears mainly feed on seals that indwell icy land. The melting ice reduces the number of seals and food intake of polar bears. In addition, polar bears are used to living in ice caves. The rising temperature causes the collapse of ice caves, which can kill baby bears. The climate change is negatively affecting the biodiversity in the region and will definitely harm the ecosystem
Although the Canadian government has done a great deal to repair the injustices inflicted on the First Nations people of Canada, legislation is no where near where it needs to be to ensure future protection of aboriginal rights in the nation. An examination of the documents that comprise the Canadian Constitution and the Charter of Rights and Freedoms reveal that there is very little in the supreme legal documents of the nation that protect aboriginal rights. When compared with the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples it is clear that the Canadian Constitution does not acknowledge numerous provisions regarding indigenous people that the UN resolution has included. The most important of these provisions is the explicit recognition of First Nations rights to their traditional lands, which have a deep societal meaning for aboriginal groups. Several issues must be discussed to understand the complex and intimate relationship all aboriginal societies have with the earth. Exploration into the effects that the absence of these rights has had the Cree of the Eastern James Bay area, will provide a more thorough understanding of the depth of the issue. Overall, the unique cultural relationship First Nations people of Canada have with Mother Earth needs to be incorporated into the documents of the Canadian Constitution to ensure the preservation and protection of Canadian First Nations cultural and heritage rights.s
Few Canadians acknowledge the Aboriginals and their land rights, and even fewer Canadians study them. The Royal Proclamation of 1763 is considered one of the most important treaties in history to be made with the Native People; yet very few have even a vague idea when they hear the words “Royal Proclamation, 1763”. Even with the grounds that the Royal Proclamation of 1763 provided, Canada has repeatedly shown ill treatment towards Aboriginals in an repugnant manner. The Royal Proclamation should be respected as an official treaty, signified as a milestone, as well as to be a lesson to teach Canadians equality toward Aboriginals.
Conflict between Canada and the First Nations has been going on since the Europeans first arrived. After their arrival the First Nations way of life was hindered severely; The Europeans brought many diseases that the Aboriginal people were unfamiliar with and had no resistance to, or cure for. “By the 16th century about 80% of Canada's Native population had died from the various diseases (Renneboog, 5).” The Europeans also came to Canada with the intentions of taking all of the land for themselves, disregarding the people who occupied the land before them. Over time the Europeans had manipulated the First Nations to their will and the Aboriginals were discriminated for their different complexion, culture, customs, and way of life. But between the years 1945 and 2010 there have been many changes involving interactions with the First Nations people. Some changes were good, but most of them were bad. Canada does not deserve to be known as a nation that demonstrates equality because it has not given the First Nations people equal rights to their land, it was discriminatory to their culture and way of life, and it has denied them of a safe and legitimate education.
The unit readings argue that anthropologists insist that global flows also partake in affecting local practices. The beliefs and customs of the Inuit are accounted for their interaction with the environment, but these factors also interrelate with neighbouring societies, global capitalism, and international NGOs, as Martha of the North describes. The Inuit were used by the Canadian government in a form of racism and cruelty. To affirm sovereignty in the vast arctic land, Canada had to have permanent residences residing within these territories. They had created a façade that they were providing the Inuit with the opportunity of a better life when in reality, they did not care about them at all. The government had less than honest intentions. What the people who represented the nation did to the relocation of the Inuit is unacceptable and its effect can be explained through holism but also goes beyond the concept on an international scale. Global practices influenced the local practices of the Inuit in the High Arctic. The government representatives of Canada at that time did not value the lives of these people and only cared about their own
This paper supports Thomas Flanagan's argument against Native sovereignty in Canada; through an evaluation of the meanings of sovereignty it is clear that Native sovereignty can not coexist with Canadian sovereignty. Flanagan outlines two main interpretations of sovereignty. Through an analysis of these ideas it is clear that Native Sovereignty in Canada can not coexist with Canadian sovereignty.
O DODSON, Edward. “Canada: an idea that must survive”. Online at: http://www.uni.ca/livreouvert/dodson_e.html , consulted on February 9, 2004.
The year 1907 marked the beginning of treaty making in Canada. The British Crown claims to negotiate treaties in pursuance of peaceful relations between Aboriginal peoples and non-Aboriginals (Canada, p. 3, 2011). Treaties started as agreements for peace and military purposes but later transformed into land entitlements (Egan, 2012, p. 400). The Royal Proclamation of 1763, which recognizes Indian sovereignty and its entitlement to land, became the benchmark for treaty making in Canada (Epp, 2008, p. 133; Isaac & Annis, p. 47, 48; Leeson, 2008, p. 226). There are currently 70 recognized treaties in Canada, encompassing 50 percent of Canadian land mass and representing over 600,000 First Nations people (Canada, 2013). These treaties usually have monetary provisions along with some financial benefits given by the Crown, in exchange for lands and its resources (Egan, 2012, p. 409). Its purpose should be an equal sharing of wealth that is beneficial for Aboriginal and non-Aboriginals (Egan, 2012, p. 414).
In 2005, an intergovernmental agreement between the Liberal government of Canada and the leaders of the national Aboriginal organizations was initiated. The treaty was known to be the Kelowna Accord. The ob...
A century ago, Canada was under control by the British Empire. The battles we fought the treaties we signed and the disputes we solved all helped us gain independence from our mother country “Britain”. Canadians fought a long battle protecting others, and from these battles we gained our peaceful reputation and our independence from Britain. Canada became a nation on July, 1st 1867. Although we were an independent country, our affairs and treaties were all still signed by Britain. In the next years Canada would establish its own government, and lead its own affairs. Many important events led to Canada’s independence, one of the earliest signals that Canada wanted to establish autonomy was the Chanak affair of 1921. In addition the battle of Normandy, which occurred on June 6 1944, contributed to the autonomy of Canada. The Suez Canal Crisis, which took place in the year 1956, earned Canada a place in the media spotlight, displaying Canada as a peaceful country that deserves the right to be independent. One of the final steps that aided with Canada’s independence from Britain was the Canada Act of 1982. Independence from Britain steadily increased throughout the 20th century because of political decisions made in Canada.
The cod wars between Iceland and Great Britain were ongoing from 1952-1976 and escalated three times throughout that period of time.1 This paper focuses on the cod war conflict between Great Britain and Iceland from 1972-1976 however a brief history of earlier conflicts is necessary in order to understand the critical period being analyzed. The conflict stemmed from the “extension of the fishery limits from three to four nautical miles by Iceland in 1952”2 this was largely as a result of the decline in marine resources available that Iceland “ for a long time been largely dependent on.”3 “The disappearance of the herring in Icelandic waters combined with a decline in export prices between 1966 and 1968 led to a drop in real per capita income in excess of 16 per cent”4 therefore Iceland found it necessary to extend fishery limits for the preservation of their economy. Britain’s initial reaction to the extension of fishing limits delivered by Iceland was a ban on processing and Icelandic fish in the UK.5 In retaliation Iceland turned to the Soviets; a large importer of Icelandic fish and “by 1955 the Soviet Union was the largest single importer of Icelandic fish and had replaced Britain as Iceland’s second largest trading partner.”6 The conflict turned from resource based to political with the potential for an “economic and diplomatic rapprochement” between Iceland and the Soviet Union7 which sparked concern among members of the OEEC (The Organization for European Economic Co-operation re-named OECD - Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development). In order to prevent closer relations between the Soviet Union and a Western state the OEEC “set up an informal group of negotiators who succeeded in preparing a resolution of the...
In a world far different from our own in the Northern Hemisphere lies an indigenous society known as the Inuits. Specifically focusing on the Inuits of Greenland these people have adopted various risk management strategies which has enabled them to survive in a harsh arctic environment. In indigenous cultures, their well-being and sustainability is managed through control of population growth like most present day indigenous societies have been influenced by western ideas and technologies, in which some of these influences have been beneficial while other western influences have threatened their traditional way of life.