Arctic

Thursday August 22, 2019

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Thursday August 22, 2019

Trump cancels meeting with Danish leader over Greenland no-sale

U.S. President Donald Trump said he would be putting off a planned meeting with Denmark’s prime minister because she did not want to talk about a possible U.S. purchase of the island of Greenland.

November 14, 2017

“Denmark is a very special country with incredible people, but based on Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen’s comments, that she would have no interest in discussing the purchase of Greenland, I will be postponing our meeting scheduled in two weeks for another time,” Trump said in a Twitter post on Tuesday night.

“The Prime Minister was able to save a great deal of expense and effort for both the United States and Denmark by being so direct. I thank her for that and look forward to rescheduling sometime in the future!” the president wrote.

Trump had been scheduled to make a state visit to Denmark on Sept. 2 on the invitation of Queen Margrethe II.

Hours before the trip was called off, Carla Sands, the U.S. ambassador to Denmark, tweeted that the Scandinavian country was “ready for the POTUS @realDonaldTrump visit! Partner, ally, friend.”

May 24, 2017

Earlier this week, the president told reporters that buying Greenland, which is part of the Kingdom of Denmark but has extensive home rule, would be “a large real estate deal” that could ease a financial burden on Denmark.

Frederiksen had ruled out any sale. Danish officials have been adamant about no-sale since reports emerged last week that Trump had directed advisers and lawyers to review a possible deal.

“Greenland isn’t for sale, Greenland isn’t Danish, Greenland is Greenlandic,” she said Sunday during a visit to Greenland, according to local newspaper Sermitsiaq. “I keep trying to hope that this isn’t something that was seriously meant.” (Toronto Star) 

Wednesday May 8, 2019

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Wednesday May 8, 2019

Mike Pompeo rejects Canada’s claims to Northwest Passage as ‘illegitimate

January 27, 2006

Mike Pompeo, the US secretary of state, has rejected Canada’s claims to the Northwest Passage as “illegitimate”, in a high-profile foreign policy speech that prompted frustration and surprise among experts and government officials.

Delegates from Arctic nations – Canada, Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, Russia, Sweden and the US – had gathered in Finland to discuss balancing climate change with resource development in the region.

“No one denies Russia has significant Arctic interests,” Pompeo told delegates of the Arctic Council on Monday. “We recognize that Russia is not the only nation making illegitimate claims: the US has a long contested feud with Canada over sovereign claims through the Northwest Passage.”

April 1, 1999

The Arctic route linking the Atlantic and the Pacific offers a potential shortcut between Europe and China. Although the passage remains ice-bound for much of the year, it has become increasingly usable because of global warming and the retreat of Arctic sea ice.

While the United States has long maintained that the route, often blocked by sea ice, lies in international waters, Canada has argued the waters pass through sovereign territory.

Foreign affairs minister Chrystia Freeland dismissed Pompeo’s remarks after a meeting with her American counterpart.

“Canada is very clear about the Northwest Passage being Canadian. There is both a very strong and geographic connection with Canada,” Freeland told reporters.

Michael Byers, a professor of political science at the University of British Columbia and author of International Law and the Arctic, said Pompeo’s remarks were consistent with US policy. But he said the “belligerent” speech contained numerous,“factual mistakes and logical inconsistencies”.

July 26, 2007

Byers said: “He talked about Chinese investments in infrastructure in the Canadian Arctic, [but] there are none. That was a straight-out factual misstatement.”

Pompeo also came in for criticism for enthusing about the “abundance” of resources available for extracting in the Arctic as climate change causing ice to retreat. “Steady reductions in sea ice are opening new passageways and new opportunities for trade, that can potentially slashing the time it takes for ships to travel between Asia and the West by as much as 20 days,” he said.

The council meeting ended without a joint final statement from council members, after the US delegation balked at the inclusion of the phrase “climate change”.It marked the first time the Arctic Council had failed to produce a declaration since 1996.

“I actually celebrate the fact that the seven other countries stood up to the Trump administration” said Byers. “We’re talking about about six close allies of the United States – four of them Nato partners – drawing a line in the snow saying you cannot have a declaration without acknowledging the crisis of climate change.” (Source: The Guardian) 

 

Tuesday February 12, 2019

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Tuesday February 12, 2019

Why Canada needs to make the Arctic a national priority

July 26, 2007

You may not know this, but Canada’s Arctic makes up nearly 40 per cent of our country’s land. Based on that alone, you would think that our federal government would prioritize the protection, careful development and stewardship of the far north.

But you’d be wrong. If northern development and affairs are priorities with the Trudeau government, it’s not obvious from the outside. In fact, a growing number of international experts are voicing concern that Canada is falling behind in terms of coherent policy and ambition of our northern territory.

Scandinavian countries aren’t making the same mistake. Neither are Russia and China, both of whom have robust and ambitious goals and are taking actions that should concern Canadians.

Russia, for example, is remilitarizing its far north in order to improve its access to Arctic territories. There is new military hardware, improved communication infrastructure. Industry, surface and marine transport and offshore resource development have seen massive investment. Russia is also expanding its icebreaker fleet to improve shipping lane access.

April 1, 1999

China last year released a white paper about the Arctic. Its stated policy goals are to “understand, protect, develop and participate in the governance of the Arctic, so as to safeguard the common interests of all countries and the international community in the Arctic, and promote sustainable development of the Arctic.”

This issue isn’t new. But it’s getting more urgent for a couple of reasons. One is climate change. With ice receding shipping channels are getting bigger and more accessible and commercial interests are getting more pressing. The other is Russia’s ambitious push to restore its place in the world order — to levels it hasn’t enjoyed since the days of the USSR — and the place Arctic development and ownership play in that.

Then there is Finland, and other Nordic countries, where northern development has always been more of a priority than in Canada. At the University of Oulu, on the edge of the Arctic Circle, Finns are testing a 5G network to study and develop communication technology and innovation. And in 2016, the Finnish government launched the Aurora project, referred to as an “Arctic intelligent transport test ecosystem” to facilitate testing of autonomous vehicle technology in harsh conditions on northern roads. (Continued: Hamilton Spectator Editorial) 

 

Thursday January 31, 2019

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Thursday January 31, 2019

Trump is the most polarizing president on record — and almost nobody’s opinion of him is changing

Gallup’s Jeffrey Jones put things succinctly.

November 3, 2018

“Extreme partisan views of presidents are the new norm in politics,” he wrote in presenting new data on the partisan gulf in approval of President Trump. “The past 15 presidential years account for 14 of the top 15 most polarized years since Gallup began regularly measuring both job approval and party identification in the 1950s.”

The exception? 1996, when President Bill Clinton had an approval rating of 85 percent from Democrats and 24 percent from Republicans. To which the natural reaction is: His approval rating among Republicans was that high?

Since 2010, the average presidential approval rating from an opposing party in a year hasn’t topped 13 percent — and that was in 2010, when President Barack Obama’s approval rating was still slipping from his post-inauguration high.

The gap now is 79 points, 21 points shy of the maximum possible gap.

Who knows. Maybe we’ll get there.

But there’s another interesting aspect to Trump’s approval ratings that is worth isolating. The gap in 2017, according to Gallup, was only slightly narrower. Unlike Obama, Trump didn’t enjoy a period of broader support at the time of his inauguration. Views of Trump have been remarkably consistent by party since he took office.

There’s some movement, but not a lot. Data released Tuesday by Quinnipiac University make that clear. In Quinnipiac’s first poll of Trump’s favorability, taken less than a week after his inauguration, about a fifth of Americans had no opinion of his job performance. In the next poll, taken in early February 2017, 42 percent approved of his performance (including 88 percent of Republicans), and 51 percent disapproved (including 90 percent of Democrats). In Tuesday’s poll? Forty-one percent approve (including 86 percent of Republicans), and 55 percent disapprove (including 93 percent of Democrats).

Polar Vortex Animated Version!

What’s more, we’d normally expect some movement within those groups, as people who strongly supported the president became less enthusiastic or those who opposed him a bit grew more fervent. But while there are some isolated examples of shifts within each group in Quinnipiac’s polling, how strongly people view Trump has been steady over the course of the presidency. (Washington Post) 

 

Thursday January 25, 2018

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Thursday January 25, 2018

Climate researchers press Trudeau to renew Canadian Arctic research program

The Canadian government should renew funding for a soon-to-end Arctic climate and atmospheric research program, a group of more than 250 international climate scientists is arguing in an open letter to Prime Minister Justin Trudeau.

“There is a crisis looming for Canadian climate and atmospheric research that will be felt far beyond Canada’s borders,” the letter states. Extending funding for the 6-year-old Climate Change and Atmospheric Research (CCAR) program, which is set to end this year, would help maintain the country’s scientific and political leadership in the field, the authors say.

CCAR, launched in 2012, provides CA$7 million per year for seven research networks studying the physical processes underlying climate and atmospheric behavior. Among other activities, the networks monitor and model tiny particles known as aerosols, biogeochemical trace elements in the Arctic Ocean, and atmospheric temperatures in the high Arctic.

So far, the Trudeau government has been mostly silent on CCAR’s future, frustrating scientists concerned about the program’s fate. It has given one part of the program a temporary reprieve; In November 2017, the government announced CA$1.6 million in funding for the Polar Environment Atmospheric Research Laboratory, located on the remote Ellesmere Island in Canada, to keep it running until 2019. (Source: ScienceMag) 

 

SaveSave