Why the U.S. Needs an Ambassador to the North Pole

The country is about to gain a whole lot more responsibility in the Arctic region that Russia, China, and others are vying to control.

National Journal
Marina Koren
Add to Briefcase
Marina Koren
May 5, 2014, 3:35 a.m.

It sounds like a joke at first.

Reps. Jim Sensen­bren­ner and Rick Larsen in­tro­duced a bill last week to es­tab­lish a U.S. am­bas­sad­or-at-large for Arc­tic af­fairs. In oth­er words, someone to rep­res­ent the na­tion at the North Pole.

The wise­cracks are bound­less. Could this cre­ate a power struggle with Santa Claus? Would po­lar bears serve on the am­bas­sad­or’s staff? Has Rudolph re­leased a state­ment?

But ap­point­ing a U.S. am­bas­sad­or to the Arc­tic is a le­git­im­ate re­quest — and a smart one, too.

The U.S. is a mem­ber of the Arc­tic Coun­cil, an in­ter­gov­ern­ment­al for­um cre­ated in 1996 to fa­cil­it­ate co­oper­a­tion among na­tions whose land­mass ex­tends in­to the North Pole. The group, which in­cludes Rus­sia, Canada, Nor­way, Den­mark, Fin­land, Sweden, and Ice­land, fo­cuses ex­clus­ively on is­sues like en­vir­on­ment­al pro­tec­tion, trade routes, and fish­er­ies at the top of the globe — and leaves polit­ics out of it.

That’s how it’s al­ways been. But the north can’t ig­nore ten­sions farther south forever. At a weeklong sum­mit in March, the coun­cil’s Ca­na­dian rep­res­ent­at­ives said they were keep­ing a close eye on their Rus­si­an coun­ter­parts’ re­marks in light of the on­go­ing Ukraine crisis. And next year, the United States, the lead­ing skep­tic of Rus­si­an motives, takes its turn as the chair of the Arc­tic Coun­cil.

“We need someone with am­bas­sad­ori­al rank to show that the U.S. is ser­i­ous about be­ing an Arc­tic na­tion,” Sensen­bren­ner, a Wis­con­sin Re­pub­lic­an, said in a state­ment. “As Rus­sia con­tin­ues to act ag­gress­ively, in­clud­ing mak­ing claims in the Arc­tic, and as China states its own in­terest, the U.S. must co­ordin­ate its Arc­tic policy and pro­tect its do­mest­ic en­ergy sup­ply at the highest level.”

Cur­rently, 20 dif­fer­ent fed­er­al agen­cies, in­clud­ing the State De­part­ment, the Pentagon, and the Na­tion­al Sci­ence Found­a­tion, are charged with hand­ling Arc­tic policy. The le­gis­la­tion would stream­line that work un­der one am­bas­sad­or, who would serve as Arc­tic Coun­cil chair un­til 2017.

No coun­try has yet laid full claim to the Arc­tic re­gion, which in­cludes the North Pole and is home to 15 per­cent of the world’s oil and a third of its un­dis­covered nat­ur­al gas. But sev­er­al na­tions have tried to ex­tend their sov­er­eignty there, which re­quires prov­ing that their con­tin­ent­al shelves ex­tend more than 230 miles in­to the Arc­tic Ocean. Last year, China and sev­er­al oth­er Asi­an na­tions ap­plied for a seat at the Arc­tic Coun­cil.

The coun­cil’s gov­ern­ing na­tion can some­times cre­ate fric­tion with the oth­er Arc­tic states. Last Decem­ber, Canada, the cur­rent chair, an­nounced that it plans to sub­mit a claim for ad­di­tion­al Arc­tic ter­rit­ory, in­clud­ing the en­tire North Pole. Its Arc­tic rival, Rus­sia, re­spon­ded im­me­di­ately. The next day, Rus­si­an Pres­id­ent Vladi­mir Putin ordered more troops to the re­gion.

By West­ern meas­ures, Rus­sia hasn’t played fair at the top of the world. By Rus­sia’s reck­on­ing, the West is the prob­lem. In 2009, Rus­si­an Se­cur­ity Coun­cil Sec­ret­ary Nikolai Patrushev ar­gued that “the United States, Den­mark, Nor­way, and Canada are con­duct­ing a com­mon and co­ordin­ated policy to deny Rus­sia ac­cess to the riches of the [Arc­tic] shelf.”

Un­der Dmitry Med­ve­dev, Mo­scow’s agenda was a re­l­at­ively peace­ful one: It re­solved a ter­rit­ori­al dis­pute with Nor­way and worked out policy is­sues with oth­er Arc­tic powers. Putin’s Arc­tic rhet­or­ic, however, has been hawk­ish. He hopes to re­store the coun­try’s So­viet-era power in the re­gion by mod­ern­iz­ing aban­doned air­fields and build­ing nat­ur­al-re­source in­fra­struc­ture by 2020.

The U.S. has not yet rat­i­fied the U.N. Con­ven­tion on the Law of the Sea, which means it is not eli­gible to file of­fi­cial ter­rit­ori­al claims, through Alaska, in the Arc­tic. But the Obama ad­min­is­tra­tion has hin­ted about a big­ger agenda in a re­gion whose melt­ing ice is re­veal­ing tre­mend­ous eco­nom­ic and nat­ur­al-re­source op­por­tun­it­ies.

In Feb­ru­ary, the State De­part­ment an­nounced it would ap­point a spe­cial en­voy to the Arc­tic, but no names came up. “Pres­id­ent Obama and I are com­mit­ted to el­ev­at­ing our at­ten­tion and ef­fort to keep up with the op­por­tun­it­ies and con­sequences presen­ted by the Arc­tic’s rap­id trans­form­a­tion — a very rare con­ver­gence of al­most every na­tion­al pri­or­ity in the most rap­idly chan­ging re­gion on the face of the Earth,” Sec­ret­ary of State John Kerry said at the time.

A new U.S. chair­man­ship and am­bas­sad­ori­al team would come in handy against an ag­gress­ive Rus­sia. The coun­try’s in­ter­ven­tion in Ukraine makes clear that the Krem­lin is ready to fight for its na­tion­al in­terests any­where — in­clud­ing the North Pole.

This seems to be an is­sue Re­pub­lic­ans and Demo­crats can agree on. Co­spon­sors of Sensen­bren­ner’s and Larsen’s bill in­clude Reps. Don Young, R-Alaska, and Betty Mc­Col­lum, D-Minn. In the Sen­ate, Mark Be­gich has been push­ing for more rep­res­ent­a­tion in the po­lar re­gion since 2008, and the Alaskan Demo­crat has in­tro­duced le­gis­la­tion for an in­creased U.S. Coast Guard pres­ence there.

“When I first ar­rived in the Sen­ate five years ago, I got a lot of puzzled looks when I men­tioned the Arc­tic,” Be­gich said re­cently. “With un­pleas­ant re­mind­ers of the Cold War and the vast po­ten­tial for re­source de­vel­op­ment in the re­gion, a mil­it­ary pres­ence is more im­port­ant than ever.”

What We're Following See More »
MORE DISAPPROVE OF COUNTRY’S DIRECTION
Trump Approval Rating Steady
1 hours ago
THE DETAILS

According to a new CNN poll, "37% of Americans approve of the way Trump is handling the presidency, 57% disapprove—virtually identical to his marks in late September. But the percentage who say things in the country are going well has fallen from 53% in August to 46% now."

Source:
Doesn’t Express Confidence in Marino
Trump to Declare Opioid Emergency Next Week
11 hours ago
THE LATEST

After initially promising it in August, "President Trump said Monday that he will declare a national emergency next week to address the opioid epidemic." When asked, he also "declined to express confidence in Rep. Tom Marino (R-Pa.), his nominee for drug czar, in the wake of revelations that the lawmaker helped steer legislation making it harder to act against giant drug companies."

Source:
IN LIGHT OF 60 MINUTES REVELATIONS
Manchin Asks Trump to Drop Marino’s Nomination for Drug Czar
20 hours ago
THE LATEST
WOULD OVERTURN MARINO LEGISLATION ON DRUG DISTRIBUTORS
McCaskill Will Introduce Bill in Response to “60 Minutes” Scoop
20 hours ago
THE DETAILS

In the wake of Sunday's blockbuster 60 Minutes/Washington Post report on opioid regulation and enforcement, Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-MO) has introduced legislation that "would repeal a 2016 law that hampered the Drug Enforcement Administration’s ability to regulate opioid distributors it suspects of misconduct." In a statement, McCaskill said: “Media reports indicate that this law has significantly affected the government’s ability to crack down on opioid distributors that are failing to meet their obligations and endangering our communities."

Source:
EVACUATION DRILL STARTS NEXT MONDAY
U.S. Military to Practice Evacuating Americans in S. Korea
21 hours ago
THE LATEST

"The United States military said on Monday that it would practice evacuating noncombatant Americans out of South Korea in the event of war and other emergencies, as the two allies began a joint naval exercise amid heightened tensions with North Korea. The evacuation drill, known as Courageous Channel, is scheduled from next Monday through Friday and is aimed at preparing American 'service members and their families to respond to a wide range of crisis management events such as noncombatant evacuation and natural or man-made disasters,' the United States military said in a statement."

Source:
×
×

Welcome to National Journal!

You are currently accessing National Journal from IP access. Please login to access this feature. If you have any questions, please contact your Dedicated Advisor.

Login