Nunavut – Battleground for the Arctic

Written by

Warning: this content is older than 365 days. It may be out of date and no longer relevant.

Ever heard of Nunavut, Canada? I hadn’t. That shows how badly out of date my geographic knowledge of Canada is. Nunavut was designated a Canadian territory in 1999, splitting off from the Northwest Territories. It’s a huge place – 31,000 people spread over an area the size of Western Europe, and it’s a name you’ll be hearing a lot more of in the coming years and decades. Why?

Well, Nunavut contains some of the northernmost points of North America. Previously, that was only sort of interesting, as the area is cold and icy.

Thanks to global warming, it’s not as cold nor as icy any more, and that means the opening of the Arctic Ocean to shipping. What does that mean? Ships won’t necessarily be forced to use the Panama Canal any more – a ship could conceivably sail from England to Tokyo across the Arctic Ocean – which will change the flows of international commerce. This is the Northwest Passage, and is hotly debated in international circles. Canada says the Northwest Passage is sovereign territory. The United States and the EU claim it’s international waters. The difference? Millions of dollars in shipping and passage.

Prime Minister Stephen Harper has repeated that the Northwest Passage belongs to Canada. Frankly, as an American who can actually locate it on a map, Mr. Harper is welcome to it, since most everything you can buy in the United States is made in China anyway. I suspect my opinion is probably in the minority, though. America’s track record for respecting other nations’ sovereignty hasn’t been so hot the last 7 years or so.

Is it wrong of me to say that if you can’t locate Nunavut on a map, your opinion on Canada’s sovereignty claims are automatically invalid?

Did you enjoy this blog post? If so, please subscribe right now!

Get this and other great articles from the source at www.ChristopherSPenn.com

Comments

6 responses to “Nunavut – Battleground for the Arctic”

November 18, 2007

Phillip

Very interesting thoughts indeed. And late on a Saturday evening at that.

Reply
November 18, 2007

Adele McAlear

As a Canadian, it is depressing to think that the destruction of the natural state of the north might reap economic benefits and squabbles over sovereignty. Sadly, the melting ice cap threatens the polar bear and many other species as well as the way of life of the (mostly indigenous) arctic peoples who have lived there for more than 4,000 years. Yes, increased shipping will bring economic benefits to the region and our country, but at what cost? Mind you, it would be worse if we suffered both the environmental consequences as well as economic losses due to International disputes.

For those who have never heard of Nunavut: it is a gorgeous, wild place of soaring mountains and it has a population density of just 1 person /70 kms (43.5 mi).

But just because Nunavut is remote doesn’t make it primitive. Broadband Internet (via satellite) is being used to deliver interactive educational programs and conduct e-business; the White Stripes shot their most recent video there this past summer while on tour (yes, they played Iqaluit!); and in 2004, someone I knew was fired from her job at Nunavut Tourism, because her employer disapproved of her personal blog.

Technology has made Nunavut part of the global community. Now if only the globe would unite on the environment, we could keep the polar ice intact and the sovereignty dispute would become a moot point.

Reply
November 18, 2007

phillymac

Very interesting thoughts indeed. And late on a Saturday evening at that.

Reply
November 18, 2007

Adele McAlear

As a Canadian, it is depressing to think that the destruction of the natural state of the north might reap economic benefits and squabbles over sovereignty. Sadly, the melting ice cap threatens the polar bear and many other species as well as the way of life of the (mostly indigenous) arctic peoples who have lived there for more than 4,000 years. Yes, increased shipping will bring economic benefits to the region and our country, but at what cost? Mind you, it would be worse if we suffered both the environmental consequences as well as economic losses due to International disputes.

For those who have never heard of Nunavut: it is a gorgeous, wild place of soaring mountains and it has a population density of just 1 person /70 kms (43.5 mi).

But just because Nunavut is remote doesn’t make it primitive. Broadband Internet (via satellite) is being used to deliver interactive educational programs and conduct e-business; the White Stripes shot their most recent video there this past summer while on tour (yes, they played Iqaluit!); and in 2004, someone I knew was fired from her job at Nunavut Tourism, because her employer disapproved of her personal blog.

Technology has made Nunavut part of the global community. Now if only the globe would unite on the environment, we could keep the polar ice intact and the sovereignty dispute would become a moot point.

Reply
November 22, 2007

Daniele Rossi

What’s more sad is Canada is very lax with protecting our arctic borders. There seem to be some effort to fix that but I sure hope it’s done on time. http://www.thestar.com/article/277429

Reply
November 22, 2007

Daniele Rossi

What’s more sad is Canada is very lax with protecting our arctic borders. There seem to be some effort to fix that but I sure hope it’s done on time. http://www.thestar.com/article/277429

Reply