NEWSPAPER COLUMNS
 ¶ Most Recent
¶ Miscellany
|
COMMENTARY
August 4, 2007
The North Pole
Everyone knows that Santa Claus is a citizen of Canada. Innumerable children the world over send their Christmas wishes to him every year, in care of Canada Post. And we all know that Santa lives at the North Pole. It follows, as night follows day (eventually, at 90 degrees North), that the North Pole belongs to Canada. Any child can see it!Unfortunately the old bores who bother themselves with the Law of the Sea, and therefore with claims upon the ice-encrusted Arctic Ocean, do not believe in Santa Claus. They barely acknowledge our economic claims to the first 200 miles north of Ellesmere Island, which leaves us about 250 miles short. The idea that any nation has an additional claim, to rule over that part of the sea that extends from her shores over a continental shelf, seems plausible. Thanks to the discovery of plate tectonics in the last century, we can now define a continental shelf with some degree of precision, and we may reason that the shelf is, in principle, a continuation of the land mass. The chief fisheries of the world are to be found on these shelves, and on the banks that rise from or adjoin them, and it would be good at least for the husbanding of resources to give some specific nation authority over each. These days, oil, gas, and mineral claims are even more important, so that national ownership of an adjoining sea bed can confer extraordinary wealth. We have something like the old colonial scramble for Africa, as competing interpretations over e.g. the angle of headland at each national border are pursued, with a view to the vast riches that could be disposed either way when that line is extended under the waves. Jurisdictional nightmares result, and must inevitably result. It gets even more complicated when two or more nations share a continental shelf, across from each other. If the distance is considerable, where do you draw the line between them? Especially as, by most ancient privilege, all nations have an interest in the freedom of the seas, and the right to sail the open oceans, quite regardless of their depth. Gentlemen need never resort to arms, for gentlemen may agree to a reasonable compromise. We live in a world, however, where not all the national players behave like gentlemen. Against them, gentlemen must remain well-armed, to vindicate not only their own interests, but civilization at large. This week, the Russian administration of Vladimir Putin -- true son of the Cheka -- proceeded to “annex” the North Pole, symbolically, using a submersible to plant a titanium Russian flag on the seabed. As a technological accomplishment, it was moderately impressive. Sergei Balyasnikov, speaking for the Russian Arctic and Antarctic Institute, called it more extravagantly a “massive scientific achievement,” and compared it to “placing a flag on the moon.” He at least grasped that the actors in this performance were a long way from home. As a political and diplomatic stunt, it had all the characteristics we have come to associate with Mr Putin’s presidency. It was clumsy, childish, recklessly confrontational, and at least mildly psychotic. The Russians say their explorers have “discovered” that the mid-ocean ridge passing under the Arctic Ocean is “really” an extension of the continental land mass of Siberia. Since that ridge continues to North America, an equally plausible claim could be made by Canada, and Denmark (the owner of Greenland), to resources we might find under the Pole -- which is incidentally a lot closer to us than to Siberia. The Americans (through Alaska) and the Norwegians (through Svalbard and their own northern coast) also have a place at this table. The Russian argument is about as compelling as the Santa Claus argument I mentioned above. By using it, I can make out a claim for Iceland over the oil and gas resources underlying the Persian Gulf. For I can trace one continuous line of mid-ocean ridge and submarine rises to connect the two of them together. Fortunately for us, Iceland has no nuclear missiles, and is governed by statesmen who are not at least mildly psychotic. This Russian stunt was an act of purposeful aggression against our own national interest, and the interests of all civilized nations. It should not be laughed off. Prime Minister Harper is right to realize that we must begin spending a great deal more on our Arctic defences. We should also seek closer cooperation with our allies in Washington, Copenhagen, and Oslo. David Warren
© Ottawa Citizen
|
Top