Pan Arctic Forum

Prothom Alo published an article titled, “Five Arctic nations back ‘peaceful’ dialogue over disputes”. The article reads in part as follows:

The five nations bordering the Arctic Ocean on Tuesday reaffirmed their commitment made in Greenland a decade ago to “peacefully” settle their differences over the resource-rich region threatened by climate change.

Ministers and senior officials from the United States, Canada, Russia, Denmark and Norway gathered for a two-day meeting in western Greenland’s coastal town of Ilulissat, where the initial declaration was signed on May 28, 2008.

The countries hope dialogue will resolve conflicts over the sovereignty of territories, strategic maritime passages, environmental protection and fishing.

PostNews published an article titled, “Agreement on Enhancing International Arctic Scientific Cooperation enters into force”. The article reads in part as follows:

The Arctic Council marks a special occasion on 23 May 2018 as the “Agreement on Enhancing International Arctic Scientific Cooperation,” signed in May 2017, enters into force.

In 2013, the Arctic Council announced that it would begin work towards an arrangement on improved scientific research cooperation. At that time, it was not a foregone conclusion that this work would lead to the third binding agreement negotiated under the auspices of the Arctic Council; that step was taken at the ninth Arctic Council Ministerial meeting in Iqaluit, Canada in 2015.

Boston College Environmental Affairs Law Review published an article titled, “Constitutional and Statutory Limits for Cost-Benefit Analysis Pursuant to Executive Orders 12,291 and 12,498”. The article reads in part as follows:

“Shortly after his inauguration in 1981, President Ronald Reagan presented his scheme for economic recovery before a joint session of Congress.  In that presentation, the President identified the costs federal regulations impose on government and industry as one of the major causes of the nation’s economic woes.  He quoted estimates that regulatory costs would ultimately reach nearly 100 billion dollars.

Geopolitical Monitor published an article titled, “The Ice Dragon: China’s Arctic Policy”. The article reads in part as follows:

“The Arctic Circle’s once inhospitable environment is changing dramatically, and the geopolitics of the region is shifting with it. Russia planted their flag on the seabed of the North Pole in 2007 and have been building up military installments ever since. China has been interested in the Arctic since the 1980s, and in January this year, published its first white paper on the region. President Trump, with his “America First” campaign and denial of global warming, has left behind various vacuums for other nations to pursue their interests. This is particularly true of the Arctic.

The Economist published an article titled, “China wants to be a polar power”. The article reads in part as follows:

“WHEN the occupants of “Snowpanda House” in Ahtari zoo, Finland, were first allowed to play in the open air in mid-February, they bounded out and rolled in the white stuff. Xi Jinping, China’s president, had said the furry animals would act as “messengers of friendship” when he promised them to Finland during a visit last year en route to America. On the same trip Mr Xi used a refuelling stop in Alaska to butter up his hosts there, too. The American north was “a mythical, almost mystical place”, a local spokesperson quoted him as saying—a bit “like a Shangri-La”.

The Diplomat published an article titled, “China’s Arctic Ambitions in Alaska”. The article reads in part as follows:

“For signs of Beijing’s Arctic ambition, Washington need look no further than Alaska. After Chinese President Xi Jinping left the Mar-a-Lago summit with U.S. President Donald Trump in April 2017, he stopped in Alaska, not Silicon Valley, to talk business. Alaskan Governor Bill Walker pitched Xi on his state’s economic opportunities, including liquefied natural gas (LNG) shipments. Before Trump’s trip to China a few months later, the White House announced multiple memoranda of understanding (MOU) between U.S. and Chinese oil and gas corporations, including the $43 billion Alaska LNG project. In the months since these presidential visits, the U.S.-China relationship — now on the precipice of a trade war — has grown tense. But in Alaska, deals are still moving forward.

From: Geopolitical Monitor | Opinion

By Jennifer Loy

The Arctic Ocean is one of the few places left unexplored on Earth.  Its vast frozen landmass and seas encompass all that is north of 66° 33’N, otherwise known as the Arctic Circle. It is bordered by the United States (Alaska), Canada, Denmark (Greenland), Norway, Iceland, and of course, Russia.  Outside of the littoral nations, Sweden and Finland are pertinent to the area and are also members of the Arctic Council created in 1996.

Policy Options published an article titled, “Arctic policy must embrace Indigenous knowledge and Arctic science”. The article reads in part as follows:

When the federal government announced the Canada C3 expedition last year, almost 5,000 people applied to sail through the Canadian Arctic via the Northwest Passage. But when the government announced it would develop a new Arctic Policy Framework, guiding federal activities on 40 percent of Canada’s land mass, few people noticed.

By replacing the existing Northern Strategy and Arctic Foreign Policy, the government hopes to chart a new course for the North, focusing on Arctic people instead of Arctic sovereignty. This commitment is needed because the people of northern Canada face many social challenges and are bearing the brunt of global warming.

Inside Climate News published an article titled, “The Most Important Climate Treaty You’ve Never Heard Of”. The article reads in part as follows:

“Raise a hand if you’ve heard of the Gothenburg Protocol.

“No? Well, you’re in good company. This treaty has been called an “unsung hero” in the fight against air pollution and climate change. It may be unknown in the United States, but it is a landmark international agreement, setting limits on how much black carbon and other pollutants countries can emit.

Although this theme focuses on small community preparedness, especially the EPPR project on Emergency Preparedness for Small Communities, PAME takes a wider view on preparedness for small communities in all marine activities.

Click here to read further