The Arctic This Week Take Five: Week of February 8, 2021
Nunavut Hunters Blockade Mine Access and Supplies in Protest of Proposed Expansion
On February 5, Nunatsiaq News reported that in protest of the proposed expansion of the mining project, a group of local hunters blockaded the road and airstrip which provide Baffinland’s Mary River Mine its only means of supply and employee transport. The blockade was initiated during the 10th day of a two-week Nunavut Impact Review hearing on the proposed expansion of the mine, and was ongoing as of Wednesday, February 10th, despite an extension of the impact review period. The proposed expansion comprises construction of 110 kilometers of railroad and new port dock, which will enable doubling of the mine’s output. Baffinland Iron Mines Corp. sees the expansion as necessary to maintain the financial viability of the operational mine, while the hunters and other local indigenous peoples and organisations protest that pollution of surrounding land and seas by the mine affects subsistence and is in violation of native land rights. (Arctic Today, High North News, Nunatsiaq News, Nunatsiaq News, Radio Canada International)
Take 1: This case serves as a reminder of both the potential power of Canadian First Nations to shape the future of Arctic development, and the unclear legal path to realization of that power. Canada’s recognition of “existing Aboriginal and treaty rights” in Section 35 of the Constitution act of 1982 gave Canadian First Nations a first legal opening to claim a constitutional right to direct benefit from lands and resources, in the Arctic and elsewhere, through new land claims and self-government agreements which were not previously recognised by the Canadian government. Canada’s Arctic territories and provinces – the Yukon, Northwest Territories (NWT), and Nunavut, all have proportionally high native populations relative to the rest of Canada, and the existence of Inuit-administered Nunavut under the Nunavut Land Claims Agreement Act, which represents the largest successful native land claim in Canadian history. The resolution of cases such as these will continue to define the influence that local populations – and particularly native populations – will have over the future administration and management of developments of international significance throughout the Canadian Arctic, including but not limited to that of the Northwest Passage, which goes through the NWT and Nunavut, and will become navigable as climate change proceeds and sea ice continues its retreat.
Canada and Norway Extend Ban on Arctic Cruise Ships and Pleasure Craft
On February 5, High North News reported that both Norway and Canada will extend their present bans on coastal cruising in order to minimize the spread of COVID-19. Norway will reassess its ban in the spring, and Canada’s ban has been prolonged for a full year, until February 2022. In addition to extending its ban on cruise vessels which includes all foreign ships bearing over 100 people in all Canadian waters, Canada has extended its ban on all passenger vessels or pleasure craft carrying more than 12 people in Arctic waters. (Arctic Today, High North News)
Take 2: While limiting travel makes sense in the Arctic where even small outbreaks can have large consequences due to limited healthcare infrastructure and transport, it will also limit nascent ocean-based ecotourism development, which is often touted as a key part of sustainable “blue economic development” in Norway (including Svalbard) and Canada. Against all odds, the global cruise industry has not yet collapsed, and may be able to scrape by if vaccines allow for a partial return to business beyond the Arctic this summer. The extended ban may result in the permanent closure of tourism businesses – both small and large – which were able to weather the loss of a single summer season’s revenue, but will likely not be able to recover from a second. The international cruise industry in particular may never recover from global travel bans, and in some ways this may be timely and positive for the Arctic’s broader economic development if it allows for the emergence of a more locally controlled and operated cruise industry than the pre-existing one.
U.S. and Russia Cooperate on Maritime Pollution, Bering Sea Patrol
On February 10, Arctic Today reported that the U.S. Coast Guard and the Russian Marine Rescue Service signed an updated Joint Contingency Plan, which was established in 1989 to address transboundary maritime pollution in the Bering Sea and Chukchi Sea. In conjunction with approval of the updated plan, U.S. Coast Guard Vice Admiral Scott Buschman stated that it “promotes the protection of our shared interests… in transboundary waters,” in addition to his intent to create mechanisms for further cooperation and to hold U.S.-Russia joint training exercises to prepare for pollution response across international boundaries in the future. (Arctic Today)
Take 3: This is an old plan with new significance in an era of heightened security dialogue and alarmism in broader Arctic geopolitics. As parts of the Arctic experience growing traffic and sudden geopolitical limelight, this is a reminder that the Arctic remains a difficult place to navigate, with a unique ecosystem and unique challenges that can still incentivize regional cooperation towards the realization of common good across international boundaries in the realms of pollution control, search-and-rescue and regulation of illegal fishing. This also illustrates the ways in which the Coast Guard (for instance) can operate distinctly from the broader U.S. institutional defense establishment at local and regional scales to foster positive operational relationships that bridge both geographical and political straits. While this is simply a continuation of pre-existing cooperation, it is nonetheless encouraging.
Rosatom and Novatek Join Arctic Economic Council
On February 5, the Arctic Economic Council announced that Russia’s state owned nuclear energy corporation, Rosatom, and Russian private natural gas company, Novatek, will join the international business forum as legacy members. Legacy membership is limited and allows for voting participation in the council. The Arctic Economic Council cites the commitment of both companies to high environmental standards and international best-practices in Arctic economic development and climate change mitigation. (Arctic Economic Council, Arctic Today)
Take 4: The inclusion of Rosatom and Novatek in the Arctic Economic Council and their stated commitments to sustainable development and cooperation should be celebrated. This engagement comes ahead of the assumption of Russian chairmanship of the Arctic Council in May 2021, and although Novatek is a private company, this is still broadly reflective of a major push by the Russian government to engage in international fora and rebrand as an environmentally and socially credible world leader in the Arctic which can be trusted to pioneer responsible resource development and shipping through green technology and cooperation. In any case, it is undeniable that these companies represent a Russia which will set standards for such developments by virtue of being the first to operate commercially at scale and to administer an international shipping route, the NSR, in the Arctic. It is best for all that it does so through established fora such as the AEC. In service of sustainable Arctic development, the international community should meet Novatek and Rosatom’s environmentally friendly dialogue with congratulations and a commitment to tirelessly and meticulously push for development according to the highest standards of technological potential, commensurate with the companies’ stated intent.
Nornickel Fined 146 Billion Rubles for Norilsk Oil Spill
On February 5, Reuters reported that a Russian court had ordered Norilsk Nickel to pay a total of 147 billion rubles (1.96 billion dollars) to the Russian federal government and municipal district of Norilsk for environmental damages caused by an oil spill that led to the collapse of a fuel storage tank owned by a Nornickel subsidiary. The spill in question took place last May, and released 21,000 tons of diesel into Siberian soil and rivers. Rosprirodnadzor, Russia’s Federal Service for Supervision of Natural Resources, estimated the damage at 148 billion rubles in damages, while Nornickel’s private assessment estimated only 21.4 billion rubles. (Arctic.ru, Reuters)
Take 5: This ruling marks Russia’s largest environmental penalty levied by the courts to date, and shows there is at least some muscle under the skin of the environmentally-friendly Arctic development dialogue in Moscow. Through this event, Nornickel became a poster child for an image of Russia that is prone to cover-ups and environmental mismanagement, which the Russian government is trying to shed generally and in the Arctic particularly. Greenpeace compared the spill to the Exxon Valdez oil spill in its scale and damages, and Putin was publicly furious about the company’s delayed response and perceived attempt to cover it up. Throughout the summer and fall of 2020, Nornickel made a very public effort to save face by contesting the extent of the damages in court and conducting ecological surveys in the region. It is refreshing to see that its efforts to greenwash the event have not paid off, and that the company will be pressed by Russian courts to pay the damages as externally assessed by Rosprirodnadzor.