Military Tensions Heating Up On Canada’s Coldest Frontier
The latest flashpoint in Arctic politics - Friday's revelation that Canadian fighter jets were scrambled to intercept a Russian bomber on the eve of U.S. President Barack Obama's Feb. 19 visit to Ottawa - comes as Norway and its Nordic neighbours weigh a possible military pact to defend each other against potential aggression on the polar frontier.
The proposed Nordic "declaration of solidar
More..ity" - recommended in a February report commissioned by the governments of Norway, Denmark, Sweden, Finland and Iceland - is to be considered at a May summit of foreign ministers from the five nations.
Prepared by former Norwegian foreign minister Thorvald Stoltenberg - father of Norway's current prime minister Jens Stoltenberg - the report argues for much greater co-operation among the Nordic nations, including Denmark's Greenland, in an era when melting ice is opening the Arctic Ocean to shipping, tourism and oil exploration.
"The Nordic governments should issue a mutual declaration of solidarity," the Stoltenberg report argued, as part of a plan laying out "how they would respond if a Nordic country were subject to external attack or undue pressure."
It's yet another sign, said University of Calgary political scientist Rob Huebert, of the intensifying international interest in the oil-rich Arctic, its increased strategic importance for northern nations and - above all - a growing wariness of Russia's revitalized military activity in the polar north.
The Nordic proposal, said Huebert, is clearly "Russia-inspired" - driven by recent signals from Moscow that the Arctic is a prime focus for Russia's economic growth and resurgent military.
Along with an increase in Russian patrol flights in the Arctic near Canadian and American air space, the Kremlin recently committed to strengthening military training and infrastructure in its Far North.
Defence Minister Peter MacKay and Prime Minister Stephen Harper both made strong statements on Friday conveying concern about the latest Russian flight in the Arctic.
Canada's pointed response has prompted some applause but also some skepticism from critics who suggest the Conservative government is exploiting a relatively routine encounter with a Russian aircraft to bolster support for its spending on the Canadian military and the Arctic region.
But Huebert said it's important for the Canadian government to respond firmly to displays of Russian military power in the Arctic.
"Regardless of your view of the Tories, they're not in charge of the Russian military," he said. "They're not the ones down at the Kremlin deploying these aircraft."
Huebert also noted that the Russian flight highlights a little-discussed issue related to the Northwest Passage, the disputed route through Canada's Arctic islands that this country considers part of its internal waters - a view rejected by European nations and the U.S.
But if the U.S. claim - that the Northwest Passage is an international strait - is valid, foreign flights over the Canadian sea route by Russia, the U.S. or China would have to be permitted, Huebert said.
Norway Foreign Minister Jonas Gahr Store has also recently expressed his country's concerns about Russia's expanding military presence in the Arctic.
"In recent months we have seen indications of a more ambitious and self-assertive Russian foreign policy that may make co-operation more difficult, including for Norway," Store said in his annual foreign policy address to the Norwegian legislature. "We are noting a more assertive approach to sovereignty and a return to old patterns of military exercises."
While noting that "Russia's increased military activity along the Norwegian coast probably reflects a desire to show its strength," and doesn't represent an immediate threat, Store added that "we cannot disregard the fact that the High North is still of military-strategic importance as a base for Russia's nuclear fleet and as an exercise area."
Store concluded that "firmness, contact and dialogue are the only viable way of meeting these and other challenges in our relations with Russia. Isolating this huge and historically proud nation is not in anyone's interest."
http://www.dose.ca/news/story.html?id=1340869 Less..
Added: Mar 1 2009 In: news_politics
By: drynwhyl
- Views: 2263 |
- Votes: 1 |
- Recommendations: 0 |
- Comments: 60
Comments - sort by newest to oldest
Damn reds
Posted Mar-1-2009 by "MalcolmC" (R)
They were hoping that we Russians would just walk away into the night after the collapse of the SU. Well it's not going to happen so better get used to it. Nevertheless nothing that we do in the arctic region violates the international law and we're not the ones invading other nations (like the West) or expanding military allieances (like NATO). More hypocrisy from the West.
Posted Mar-1-2009 by "Vitali_85" (R)
Oh really comrade?
What about Georgia? Didn't you just invade and steal half their country?
Freakin liars.
Posted Mar-1-2009 by "miamisam" (R)
Oh really comrade?
What about Georgia? Didn't you just invade and steal half their country?
Freakin liars.
If you're not familiar with even the barest outlines of the events in that confict then don't expect me to fill you in on that.
Posted Mar-1-2009 by "Vitali_85" (R)
Only the west invades other countries and expands military alliances?! that's news to me, i was sat here thinking about Georgia, and creation of the CSTO, and moreover statements like this: "In May 2007 the CSTO secretary-general Nikolai Bordyuzha suggested Iran could join the CSTO saying, "The CSTO is an open organization. If Iran applies in accordance with our charter, we will consider the application." - but no, that's obviously not suggesting the expansion of a military alliance at all, is it?!
Posted Mar-1-2009 by "cherrythunder" (R)
Oh really comrade?
What about Georgia? Didn't you just invade and steal half their country?
Freakin liars.
The Russians had retaliated only after the initial Georgian invasion of its separatist regions which had been de facto independent since the collapse of the Soviet Union and where people hate the Georgians due to numerous ethnic conflicts. Moreover Russia had recognized the independence of those regions so your claim that they "stole half the country" makes absolutely no sense.
Posted Mar-1-2009 by "_Anarky_" (R)
Anyone up for another cold war? This time it seems they'll have China and Iran as allies.
Posted Mar-1-2009 by "Nurb" (R)
Only the west invades other countries and expands military alliances?! that's news to me, i was sat here thinking about Georgia, and creation of the CSTO, and moreover statements like this: "In May 2007 the CSTO secretary-general Nikolai Bordyuzha suggested Iran could join the CSTO saying, "The CSTO is an open organization. If Iran applies in accordance with our charter, we will consider the application." - but no, that's obviously not suggesting the expansion of a military alliance at all, is it?!
What about Georgia? You were expecting us to sit on our hands while they were bombing our peacekeepers and our allies? They killed a dozen of our men there during the first hour of bombardment of the sleeping city. No really, what did you expect us to do?
Regarding military alliances. It's clear that the West is far more aggressive in this respect than Russia. It is NATO that is now at our borders and it is NATO troops who carry out military exercises right on our doorsteps. CSTO was created to counter this NATO expansion and its belligerance in central Asia. CSTO is no threat to the EU or America but NATO is a direct threat to Russia and it seeks to eventually encircle it.
Posted Mar-1-2009 by "Vitali_85" (R)
Good article -voted - and very insightful giving a glimpse into current and developing geopolitics 'up there'.. worth the read.
And while some of those in USgovt admin are suggesting 'cold war weapons' are NOT used today, and therefore can be cancelled (such as modernized defense aircraft F-22, etc).. should take a further examination as to what the future deterrence will USE (and is actually currently using)!
Regardless of this.. the Nordic solidarity nations Canada, US Russia need to hold a summit, ASAP, and agree to an understanding of any non-aggressive claims to the 'North resources' and agree to no unilateral claims and exploitations of resources, until a negotiated 'cooperation and joint-consortium organisation' can make the economic development agreements in future!
Time for all to chill out, take a step back, re-route the bomber flights, etc and take a breath here. There's enough work 'up there' for all interested parties!!
Cheers-
Posted Mar-1-2009 by "GeoGig" (R)
Only the west invades other countries and expands military alliances?! that's news to me, i was sat here thinking about Georgia, and creation of the CSTO, and moreover statements like this: "In May 2007 the CSTO secretary-general Nikolai Bordyuzha suggested Iran could join the CSTO saying, "The CSTO is an open organization. If Iran applies in accordance with our charter, we will consider the application." - but no, that's obviously not suggesting the expansion of a military alliance at all, is it?!
What about Georgia? You were expecting us to sit on our hands while they were bombing our peacekeepers and our allies? They killed a dozen of our men there during the first hour of bombardment of the sleeping city. No really, what did you expect us to do?
Regarding military alliances. It's clear that the West is far more aggressive in this respect than Russia. It is NATO that is now at our borders and it is NATO troops who carry out military exercises right on our doorsteps. CSTO was created to counter this NATO expansion and its belligerance in central Asia. CSTO is no threat to the EU or America but NATO is a direct threat to Russia and it seeks to eventually encircle it.
You've chanced your stance then haven't you. Firstly you implied a moral superiority over the west because Russia didn't use violence against other states. I'm not saying you shouldn't sit around doing **** all if your troops are getting killed, but the fact is, when you kicked the georgians out of s.ossetia, what did you do? sit there and take a defensive posture to deter the georgians? or did you turn the operation into a military offensive into georgia proper? Whether the CSTO was created to counter NATO or not, the fact remains that you activley looking to expand it. This is different to your earlier posture of 'only the west expands military alliances' etc. You seem to be missing the point i'm making, whilst also agreeing with it without realising. Effectively what i was saying is that Russia acts no better than the west like you claim. The fact you acknowledge Russia's military build up to counter NATO only serves to suggest you do understand that it's tit for tat, and in tit for tat you're both as bad as each other, get it??
Posted Mar-1-2009 by "cherrythunder" (R)
Vitali, with all due respect, brat, you are victim to the hysterical volley of 'Fear-mongering' propaganda custom from a state-news agenda of mobilizing the people to support a continued Central-run, secret-service/military dominated govt.
The 'Myth' of NATO circling Mother Russia should be finally burried. NATO cannot CIRCLE Russia! Russia is too dominant strategically and can wipe EU out in 3 days if she wanted! Of course, both NATO and Russia have Nuke subs which can 'encircle' the other at ANY time, so both is true as a simple fact.
NATO and Kremlin have long history now of countering each other and ensuring sufficient stale-mate deterrences as prime security to each other. This is natural, so is the natural Propaganda from both sides to reinforce the respective positions!
Time for both sides to chill out, step back, and demilitarize over the next 10 yrs, IMHO..
Time to let our common people's better reform our collective destiny for demilitarized, liberalized and overall moderated evolution!
Miru-
Posted Mar-1-2009 by "GeoGig" (R)
And while some of those in USgovt admin are suggesting 'cold war weapons' are NOT used today, and therefore can be cancelled (such as modernized defense aircraft F-22, etc).. should take a further examination as to what the future deterrence will USE (and is actually currently using)!
Regardless of this.. the Nordic solidarity nations Canada, US Russia need to hold a summit, ASAP, and agree to an understanding of any non-aggressive claims to the 'North resources' and agree to no unilateral claims and exploitations of resources, until a negotiated 'cooperation and joint-consortium organisation' can make the economic development agreements in future!
Time for all to chill out, take a step back, re-route the bomber flights, etc and take a breath here. There's enough work 'up there' for all interested parties!!
Cheers-
I have to agree Geogig. I would think that talking early can only lead to a decrease in tensions and even cooperation.
Posted Mar-1-2009 by "Boogliosi" (R)
Im sure they have already put in a call to America to come up there and defend them....like we couldnt see this coming. Always protecting the big mouth little brother.
Posted Mar-1-2009 by "RightisRight" (R)
Only the west invades other countries and expands military alliances?! that's news to me, i was sat here thinking about Georgia, and creation of the CSTO, and moreover statements like this: "In May 2007 the CSTO secretary-general Nikolai Bordyuzha suggested Iran could join the CSTO saying, "The CSTO is an open organization. If Iran applies in accordance with our charter, we will consider the application." - but no, that's obviously not suggesting the expansion of a military alliance at all, is it?!
What about Georgia? You were expecting us to sit on our hands while they were bombing our peacekeepers and our allies? They killed a dozen of our men there during the first hour of bombardment of the sleeping city. No really, what did you expect us to do?
Regarding military alliances. It's clear that the West is far more aggressive in this respect than Russia. It is NATO that is now at our borders and it is NATO troops who carry out military exercises right on our doorsteps. CSTO was created to counter this NATO expansion and its belligerance in central Asia. CSTO is no threat to the EU or America but NATO is a direct threat to Russia and it seeks to eventually encircle it.
You've chanced your stance then haven't you. Firstly you implied a moral superiority over the west because Russia didn't use violence against other states. I'm not saying you shouldn't sit around doing **** all if your troops are getting killed, but the fact is, when you kicked the georgians out of s.ossetia, what did you do? sit there and take a defensive posture to deter the georgians? or did you turn the operation into a military offensive into georgia proper? Whether the CSTO was created to counter NATO or not, the fact remains that you activley looking to expand it. This is different to your earlier posture of 'only the west expands military alliances' etc. You seem to be missing the point i'm making, whilst also agreeing with it without realising. Effectively what i was saying is that Russia acts no better than the west like you claim. The fact you acknowledge Russia's military build up to counter NATO only serves to suggest you do understand that it's tit for tat, and in tit for tat you're both as bad as each other, get it??
No I was not implying moral superiority and you're right that in the final analysis it's all tit for tat. Russia is weaker than the West at the moment so it's forced to take a defensive posture and attempt to counter Western expansion. Had the SU won the cold war things would've been very different of course with Russia being the aggressor. However my post was in response to the article which is potrays Russia as militarstic antagonist while ignoring the larger picture like NATO expanion and its invasion of other countries. I was reacting to that hypocrisy. I have to go though so I won't be able to continue this debate.
Posted Mar-1-2009 by "Vitali_85" (R)
"In the coming years you will hear a lot of talk about such things as perestroika and glasnost, don't be alarmed, comrades, these are only sweet words to lull the west to sleep."
Gorbachev.
PS: Ivan's never given up, the USSR never fell, the KGB never gave up and signed surrender, their battle plan merely evolved in a new direction.
Posted Mar-1-2009 by "michael567"