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.
The snow cover in the Northern hemisphere is the largest its been since 1966. Looks like Mother Nature has just put the "coming anarchy" on hold.
ReplyDeleteBCL, why don't you settle on some U.S. style doomsday religion, the anticipated coming anarchy scenarios in those are more entertainting than your ilk's "precise", "predictable" and "scientific" scenarios, and just as plausible I might add.
Tell that to to the Russkies, caps off.
ReplyDeleteThe snow cover in the Northern hemisphere is the largest its been since 1966.
ReplyDeleteSource: Generic wingnut denier blogger no. 1898938....now with extra "anecdotal data!"
C'mon, BCL...you can't let these anonymii persist in amplifying pseudo-science. Think of the children and all the credulous but innocently ignorant little wing-tards who converge on your blog from all parts of Greater Wingnuttia.
At long last, sir, have you no decency?
Ot but newsworthy - Chantal Hebert of the Toronto Star and Josee Legault of the Montreal Gazette both hint broadly of staged coups to replace Stephane Dion in their respective columns today.
ReplyDeleteMaybe there's hope for the Liberals on the horizon after all.
Stay on-topic, Biff/Caps Off/Frances...
ReplyDeleteIt's like the Conservatives don't know how do to anything else but lie. No one, it seems, learned the Straussian neoconservative theory of the "big lie" better than the Conservatives...from the Party elite right down to every last Conservative voter.
How do they feel when they lie like that? Do they get some sort of thrill out of the feeling of omnipotence that they're "creating reality?"
It's been a big bugger for Canadians, that's for sure, since our lil' liars are better educated than the Red State rubes down south, whose complete scientific illiteracy exposes the fraud far too quickly.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteIt is a lie, caps off, and one that got you deleted.
ReplyDeleteBut war is NEVER the answer, even if another country attacks us! That will just escalate the violence. Then you'll have people shooting people everywhere because they'll be desensitized to the violence, and parking lot disputes will end in gunfire, just like in Texas every day. We should negotiate a peaceful end to any dispute, no matter how much land it costs us, because as good little lefties, patriotism towards one's own country is only for the simple-minded. We should think from a worldview perspective, and in that regard, we can't ever lose anything because it's all still there! Happy happy joy joy, happy happy . . . .
ReplyDeleteWe should negotiate a peaceful end to any dispute, no matter how much land it costs us, because as good little lefties, patriotism towards one's own country is only for the simple-minded.
ReplyDeleteTell that to FDR and Mackenzie-King, Chickenhawk.
Conservatives just love wars they don't have to fight in or sacrifice anything for.
I wonder why that is? I suspect it's because they're all fat, drunk or senile, but it might be something else.
We can't do that if we're in Sudan or Darfur or anywhere else.
ReplyDeleteWe can't do that if we're in Sudan or Darfur or anywhere else.
ReplyDeleteWhich is why I support three things when it comes to Canadian sovereignty in the High Arctic: three nukes...one aimed Washington, one at Moscow and one at Beijing.
Cheap and fully automated...thus freeing up resources for other, more entrenched conflicts...such as the democratisation of Alberta and the freeing of Alabama from theocracy.
Poor banned caps off; hasn't figured out yet that warmer air melts more ice and absorbs more moisture and thus produces more precipitation when it cools down for winter.
ReplyDeleteThe apocalypse is near. I agree with BCL on this one. We had better become serious about beefing up our military and research presence and about protecting our sovereignty.It's difficult to get people worked up about an issue like this in that very few Canadians have been north of the 55'th parallel and even fewer care about what happens in the Arctic. You can bet that the Russians and Americans care. If we don't have a presence on our claimed territory and waters then The Law of Discovery leaves us open to predatory attacks by these powers that we'd be ill prepared to repulse. The Hans Island comedy was just a precursor of future conflicts.
ReplyDelete