:quality(70)/arc-anglerfish-arc2-prod-adn.s3.amazonaws.com/public/2BDH7PSGQZH5HASDCAMBGG5XIU)
Two major events occurred in or about the Arctic last month. The first was the ministerial meeting of the Arctic Council held in Rovaniemi, Finland in early May. The second was the Arctic Circle China Forum held in Shanghai, China, a self-described ‘near-Arctic nation.’ At both events, the Arctic activities of the United States, Russia and China dominated the headlines, making now a good time to look at how these three powers are jockeying for influence on the international stage.
According to several persons present at the Finland-hosted Arctic Council Ministerial who flew directly to Iceland’s Arctic Circle meetings conducted in Shanghai several days later, the U.S. Secretary of State “shocked” the typically diplomatic biannual Ministerial by hurling bullying and cantankerous remarks on the eve of the Ministerial. Secretary Mike Pompeo reserved his particular ire for Russia, China and even, Canada. Whether his remarks reflected envy of China’s growing Arctic presence, or a spillover of the U.S. ‘trade war’ to demonize China while being “tough on Russia” is not clear. However, the Secretary did refer to China’s massive multi-billion dollar Polar Belt and Road investments as a prelude to “territorial aggression.”
The U.S. Secretary also objected to the use of the phrase, “climate change” in the Arctic Council’s Ministerial Statement. Pompeo’s objection meant that for the first time, no joint statement was issued by the Arctic Nations since the Arctic Council’s 1996 founding as an intergovernmental forum dedicated to cooperative Arctic science, environmental protection and related activities among all Arctic states, indigenous peoples and, now, “observer states,” such as China.
The effects of Pompeo’s lashing out at U.S. Arctic allies, even adversaries – certainly, not enemies – in a region long known as a “zone of peace,” resonated at the Shanghai-Arctic Circle meetings several days later. Opening remarks by Wang Hong, Director of China’s State Oceanic Administration of the Chinese Ministry of Natural Resources and other high-level officials, may have been hitting back as they described China’s interest in the science of Arctic warming that is impacting Chinese weather patterns. The high levels officials insisted that China’s massive investment across Russia’s Northern Sea Route, environmentally controversial Polar Belt and Road initiative, would “be green,” irrespective of sessions with titles such as “Paving the Belt and Road.”
Arctic Circle Founder, former Iceland President Olafur Ragnar Grimsson, expanded upon the Chinese representatives’ pledge to address climate change to the some 500 delegates from more than 20 countries in what he heralded as an “historic meeting" – the first dedicated exclusively to Arctic issues in China. With his seeming Gorbachev-Reagan-in-Reykjavik sensibility, President Grimsson thanked the Chinese officials for their concern about Arctic climate matters. Then, he proceeded to describe the changes in climate and weather patterns, particularly experienced in the Arctic region, as being accelerated by the burning of carbon fuels. The President remarked that “China’s reliance on” coal-fired generator plants contributes to a “circular pattern” of Arctic warming, that then contributes to destructive weather patterns worldwide.
The “bluster” on climate from Secretary Pompeo, flies in the face of most recent reports that express concern about climate change ranging from the U.S. Department of Defense, the Congressionally required Fourth National Climate Assessment, the IPCC Global Warming Special Report 2018, and, sufficient concern to the convening of a coalition of 39 central banks, about half the global economy, study on the effects of climate change on financial markets.
The former President thanked the Chinese officials for working with Iceland for, thus far, installing some 70 geothermal plants across China to replace coal-based electricity. Given the memorandum of understanding signed between Iceland and China suggests the possibility of more conversions from coal to geothermal – such as occurred in Iceland some 70 years ago, is likely. Iceland’s Director General of Orkustofnun, the nation’s National Energy Authority,
Gudni A. Johannesson, told this observer that “the air quality situation is quite serious in China” – more than 200,000 people reportedly die annually of respiratory diseases caused by a combination of pollution by coal-fired electrical plans and petro-chemicals, often located in the outskirts of communities.
Sen. Lisa Murkowski, flying in from Finland to Shanghai, was well received in her remarks that promoted a spirit of cooperation in the region. The senator, who has noted the U.S. need for functional icebreakers, deep-draft ports and other Arctic infrastructure, expressed concern for climate impacts and responded to a question from a panel presenter, noting that she would bring the issue of geothermal energy development to Washington to determine any congressional interest.
The Arctic Circle China meetings seemed to stand for the twin principles of coexistence and cooperation. President Grimsson’s ethic – that of a small Island nation unafraid to face the largest Arctic, or near Arctic- nations and demand, perhaps by the power of presence, the maintenance of a stable and environmentally protected region, irrespective of new rules, different governance models of nations operating in the Arctic, or conventional notions of security. If nothing else, the Arctic Circle – China meeting offered an option of no–one being left outside of the Arctic discourse where explosive growth is unfolding in a region where a new Mediterranean-sized ocean is opening at the top of the world at the North Pole.
Despite the bombast by the U.S. Secretary, U.S. Ambassador David Balton, former representative of the United States to the Arctic Council, expressed an optimistic view. The former Ambassador said in a telephone interview that “efforts to strengthen international governance of the Arctic will continue.”
Whether or not the cooperative model will continue to evolve raises a series of unfolding and vital questions, not the least of which is to keep external geopolitics from seeping in. And, climate, in all of its meanings, in check.
Anita L. Parlow is a recent Fulbright scholar in Iceland, Team Lead for the inaugural Woodrow Wilson Polar Code Roundtable Project, and advisor for the Harvard–MIT Arctic Fisheries Project. Parlow has advised corporations, NGOs and international agencies on Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental and Community Risk.
The views expressed here are the writer’s and are not necessarily endorsed by the Anchorage Daily News, which welcomes a broad range of viewpoints. To submit a piece for consideration, email commentary(at)adn.com. Send submissions shorter than 200 words to letters@adn.com or click here to submit via any web browser. Read our full guidelines for letters and commentaries here.