Networking the North Cross Border Connections and the

Networking the North: Cross Border Connections and the New International Circumpolar Geopolitics

I. The Circumpolar North Emerges Ø 1989 l Ø 1990 s— 2006 l Ø the end of the Soviet Union new prospects for a new round of cooperation for social, political and economic change 2007 -2008 l a sense of “competition” for territory

Examples of Early Cooperative Agreements Ø Rovaniemi Agreement in (1991) l l major international cooperation The Arctic Council • Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Program (AMAP) l host of other formal and informal agreements which are comprehensive, region-wide • “northern dimension” policies in both north America and Europe, led to cooperative foreign policies across boundaries.

Brokered by “Environment and Science” Ø are uniting agendas within the international community—forum for co-operation l some powers, specifically the United States, understood these arenas to be distinct from foreign policy discussions

By early 21 st century geopolitical context of the circumpolar North took on new significance --civil society. Ø numbers of individuals involved in regional policy-making has proliferated since the late 1980 s Ø indigenous voices began to be heard, and facilitated the replacement of old military security and Cold War discourse --comprehensive or human security Ø

Networks of Connectivity Ø by 2005 negotiation” of a circumpolar region post Cold-War saw, complex regionbuilding discourses which favour inclusivity and transnational civil society Inuit Circumpolar Conference

II. From co-operation to competition… shifted as new challenges emerged in the early 21 st century Ø new challenges Ø l l l Ø threat of global warming, melting ice, increased international competition for maritime territories and declining interest in comprehensive security outcomes. has become the way in which Arctic regionalism is currently being explained by media “Arctic Rush!” or “Melting Relations!” geopolitical discourse which calls for urgent and competitive geostrategic thinking

The Great Game Revisited? Ø Russia l exploration of the Lomonosov Ridge and claim to the North Pole in the summer of 2007 Ø Canadian government’s new security concerns within the North l adopted a relatively aggressive nation-building stance, with programs designed to heighten military presence and protection in key areas of Canadian sovereign territory, like the Northwest Passage

Where do the geopolitics of high drama and territorial clashes fit into this scenario of interconnectivity?

Territoriality has replaced science and environment as the leading geopolitical discourse…

Russia, Canada, Norway, Denmark, U. S. entering the age of claims Ø Ø “Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper has announced his country is to build two military bases in the Arctic as part of their bid to claim sovereignty of part of the region. Harper said the new cold-weather army training base at Resolute Bay and a refurbished supply base at Nanisivik would establish Canada's claims over the disputed territory. Ø "Canada's new government understands that the first principle of Arctic sovereignty is use it or lose it. Today's announcements tells the world that Canada has a real, growing, long-term presence in the Arctic. " Ø http: //www. nemsplace. co. uk/news. php? 20

Norway: Geo-economics? Ø “One challenge for Norway is to mark a line of delimitation with the Russians. A settling of the line would add stability to the region and ease the development of oil and gas resources. When Norway wants to secure a balance with the EU, various EU countries and the US with respect to maintaining sovereignty in the area, she may also face a pressure to settle an agreement. If Russian relations with the West are good, this pressure may work against Norway. Russia will remain the biggest and most important actor in supplying more energy to both Europe and the world, and be of higher importance to the West than Norway should accept (and possibly expect) the processes still to take much time to be finished. “

III. Is this new discourse now hegemonic? is the age of co-operation over? can we still speak of a circumpolar North, as an international region of cooperation Ø media would say yes Ø Ø l Ø —link to terrorism, Russia and China discourses premature to suggest that competitive discourses signal the end of a co-operative human security agenda within the circumpolar North • discourse of competitive claims and nation-building agendas has, for example, engendered a refocusing of the North as the primary site for setting the terms of “international” interaction • UNCLOS a major forum—undisputed jurisdiction • in North America the competative models are stressed, because of the hegemonic role of the U. S. -- there is an important subtext to current cooperation within the Arctic which is not appreciated by North Americans, and indeed is absent from many north American considerations of Arctic cooperation—the role of Europe

Europe has re-emerged as an extremely important broker in Northern cooperation Ø models of Europe cooperation versus North America competition Ø l low geopolitics of civil society and sustainable development versus the high geopolitics of nationbuilding and geoeconomics.

Barents and Baltic Cooperation

IV. Current Co-operative Discourses Ø Ø Ø “in May 2008, Denmark's Foreign Minister, Per Stig Møller, urged respect for international law from nations bordering the Arctic Ocean region and wants cooperation to prevent an environmental catastrophe. “We must continue to fulfill our obligations in the Arctic area until the UN decides who will have the right to the sea and the resources in the region. We must agree on the rules and what to do if climate changes make more shipping possible. ” “We also have an obligation to provide for sustainable development of the Arctic Ocean with respect for indigenous people who have fished and hunted here for centuries. ” Together with the Greenlandic Premier, Hans Enoksen, Møller has invited foreign ministers from Norway, Canada, Russia and the US to a conference about the Arctic Ocean. ”[1] [1]Arctic Council Website. Conference on the Arctic Ocean. The Danish Foreign Minister wants unity about the future of the Arctic Ocean. Outrageous attempts to make demands on the Arctic Ocean region should be a thing of the past. http: //arcticcouncil. org/article/2008/5/conference_on_the_arctic_ocean. May 25, 2008. Accessed June 19, 2008.

florescence of regional actors involved in the performance of new regional governmental initiatives, particularly in north Europe but also throughout the circumpolar North. Ø Indigenous people’s organizations and intergovernmental organizations have been effective in bridging borders and linking the region from east to west. Ø

UNCLOS Ø Ø “the emergence of new structures to resolve disputes in the Arctic, as reflected by the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), which provides various mechanisms for dealing with competing claims…All three of these issues are coming together, and that means the time of the Arctic is now. …all these factors, and the manner they’re all intersecting, basically mean this is the initial phase of a new Arctic international regime. ”[1] Huebert, quoted in, Barry S. Zellin, Viewpoint: Cold Front Rising, As Climate Change Thins Polar Ice, a New 1] Huebert, quoted in, Barry S. Zellin, Race for Arctic Resources Begins, Center for Contemporary Conflict, 2007. http: //www. ccc. nps. navy. mil/si/2008/Feb/zellen. Feb 08. asp. Accessed April 9,

Other Regional linkages in the 1990 s several counties, among them Lapland in Finland the Komi Republic in Russia, Canada and the EU, created their own regional 'foreign' and economic policy. Ø In northern Europe the idea of trans-boundary regionalism via the model of Euro-Regions includes eastwest cooperation across the national borders between the counties of the Nordic states and Northwest Russia Ø cooperation like Haparanda-Tornio has also promoted integration across the national borders among the Nordic countries Ø

V. Challenging the New Territorial Security Focus Ø Ø Conceptual tension post 9/11 formal geopolitical concerns: l Sovereignty, “control society”, military and energy security vs. co-operation and civil society delegation of human security to the lower rungs of policy concern within the North Ø reflects a new preoccupation with other definitions of security (state, energy and military) in the post 9/11 era Ø deflects attention from a pre-existing agenda of concern with the acute social and environmental threats facing indigenous populations within the region Ø are there areas where communication across borders has potential to mitigate and refocus security issues? Ø l ICT and communications part of a larger roster of institutions promoting civil society and transnationalism -- focus on low geopolitics, civil society, comprehensive security

Programme for the Norwegian Chairmanship of the Arctic Council 2006 -2008 Ø Conceptual linkage of sustainable development to co-operation and transnational activities to comprehensive security agenda: in its Programme for the Norwegian Chairmanship of the Arcti Council 2006 -2008, Noway stated …. . it will not be possible to maintain settlement patterns and ensure growth and welfare without economic activity. Therefore, the Council should also initiate broad political debate on all issues of importance to the Arctic and the people living there. These include economic activity in the energy, fisheries and mining sectors and other matters of joint interest related to social and economic development.

Will Norway’s AC sustainability and comprehensive security agenda succeed? Ø the answer really lies in the degree to which connecting institutions, discourses and projects are valued and the degree to which comprehensive security agendas can be linked to securitization discourses Ø currently AC leadership oriented towards comprehensive security (sustainable development)

VI. ICT Capacity while institutional capacity for environmental cooperation is well developed within the North, and it is possible to speak of a circumpolar region in terms of the instruments, ICT proves to be a different story. Ø to date, individualized nation-state agendas have not been an effective conduit for the delivery of ICT capacity, infrastructure and quality internet resources. Ø delivery is highly localized because the development of communications infrastructure is not perceived, by national governments, as being a transnational project in the same sense that environmental assessment and environmental treaties might be seen Ø

Ø Ø Special issues make ICT networks are critical to the delivery of comprehensive security in an nternationalized context yet it is clear that the delivery of ICT remains the domain of the national government this is true for in terms of strategies, goals, focus areas and implementation of higher education applications of ICT it is true, as well, in terms of the infrastructure and governmental policies which sustain technology programs.

But geographical conditions which impact upon delivery of ICT capacity also demand cooperative transnational efforts and cooperation among the spectrum of northern governmental and non-governmental agencies. Ø although preliminary, this cooperation if brokered through the Arctic Council, may have some important implications for the achievement of the broader goal of social equity, strengthened civil society and sustainable development. It also represents, in a nutshell, the problems faced by the circumpolar North as it attempts to redefine itself, in many ways, as an international region. Ø

VII. Communicating Across Borders Co-operation for comprehensive security and sustainable development The 2006 Arctic ICT Assessment Proposal and Rationale (AICTA) Ø a co-operative project based upon deliberations and recommendations of the Arctic Council’s ICT Technical Advisory Committee, which met as recently as 2007 to consider how to promote such projects Ø

a comprehensive document which presents the rationale for Arctic Council involvement in the study of information and communications landscapes of accessibility in the North. Ø raises the concern that the degree to which delivery of other issues such as northern health and education services, both key social and economic goals. ICT is regarded by many as an important vehicle for their delivery Ø Nunavut Broadband Project. Ø

Conclusions. . . Ø Ø Ø competition for new maritime territories have emerged in the wake of global warming, and appear to dominate regional geopolitical discourses as this paper suggests, these competitive discourses are a thin veneer upon regional cooperation which, over the past few decades, has widened and deepened in response to a comprehensive security agenda competitive notions of territoriality within the Arctic may be more imagined than real new post-war security agenda in the North also reflects a growing awareness of the need to apply the concepts of sustainable development which include a broader focus on “human security” the impact of 9/11 notwithstanding, this new approach to the definition of security has had a catalytic impact upon the structure of international relations To some extent reflects differing national geopolitical concerns (NA/EU)

Ø Ø geopolitical discourse is linked to major shifts in soft power and to the new recognition of ICT as a key to sustainable development (comprehensive security) despite some recent indications of new geopolitical pressures which might serve to launch competitive claims and challenge existing security and sovereignty concerns among North American nations, there remains a strong regional subtext of cooperation and institutional pressure for regional cooperation. whether or not this will happen in the circumpolar North is perhaps debatable, and yet in the final analysis, a co-operative relationship is potentially ensured in the existing international institutions and agendas which allow for indigenous participation and regional specificity This is why ICT is imperative and where its co-operative role will be most influential