PARIS -- The fast-warming Arctic could be plunged into "armed conflict" unless the U.S. takes the lead in resolving rival claims by the U.S., Canada, Russia, Denmark and Norway over a region that could create billions of dollars in new wealth as the ice cap melts, according to new analysis.
Which is why I 100% support Tory efforts to "bulk up" our military and surveillance capabilities in the North, and why it is especially tragic that we are pissing away $1,000,000s that could be used for this effort in the deserts of Central Asia.
Here is the original article. In it, author Scott G Borgerson minces no words when describing "The Coming Anarchy":
The situation is especially dangerous because there are currently no overarching political or legal structures that can provide for the orderly development of the region or mediate political disagreements over Arctic resources or sea-lanes. The Arctic has always been frozen; as ice turns to water, it is not clear which rules should apply. The rapid melt is also rekindling numerous interstate rivalries and attracting energy-hungry newcomers, such as China, to the region. The Arctic powers are fast approaching diplomatic gridlock, and that could eventually lead to the sort of armed brinkmanship that plagues other territories, such as the desolate but resource-rich Spratly Islands, where multiple states claim sovereignty but no clear picture of ownership exists.
Until such a solution is found, the Arctic countries are likely to unilaterally grab as much territory as possible and exert sovereign control over opening sea-lanes wherever they can.
While it is certainly possible to maintain that the Afghanistan mission is in Canada's national interest, the arguments tend to be indirect and circuitous: we must maintain our alliances and so forth. The argument for keeping the Russkie's grubby mitts off Baffin Island, for example, is much more direct.
But we can't do that if our guys are running around in circles outside of Kandahar.