Testing the waters - Canadian Geographic Magazine Surveys

NEWSLETTER

Surveys

Testing the waters

With ballots barely counted and campaign signs still stuck in snow banks, David Wilkins, the U.S ambassador to Canada, was ready to start testing the waters of U.S./Canada relations with prime minister designate Stephen Harper. Wilkins stated his government's opposition to Harper's election promises to begin actions to assert Canadian sovereignty over the Arctic, particularly over the disputed waters of the Northwest Passage.

Wilkins insists that Canada is causing a fuss over nothing and stated that it is well known that the U.S., and many other countries, do not recognize Canada's claim to the waters. Harper quickly defended Canada's right to defend what it claims to be its territory and dismissed the possibility of the U.S. dictating decisions pertaining to Canadian sovereignty.

As arctic ice recedes, scientists are scrambling to determine how soon the icy waters will open up and ships are looking to the Northwest Passage as a viable shipping shortcut. If deemed an international strait, the delicate ecosystem of the Passage would become vulnerable under lax international laws. How should Canada proceed on the issue? Do you think our claim is legitimate? What would the loss of sovereignty mean for Canada? Tell us what you think.

NAME

COMMENTS

D.B. McLachlan

Submitted:
Monday, March 27, 2006

I believe the American gov't sees and takes what it wants and we as Canadians must stand firm on our borders.

Brian Morton

Submitted:
Sunday, March 26, 2006

I think Canada should definitely claim sovereignty over this waterway.To do
nothing would send a wrong message to the world(USA} that we do not have a clear idea of our northern boundaries.

We should furthermore, treat it like any toll bridge or hiway. A token toll would show the world that we mean to control our assets as we see fit.

Larry Harris

Submitted:
Friday, March 10, 2006

I do believe Canada should insist on our sovereignty in all of the Arctic, as we have done from the beginning.

Now that it might be navigable the US is starting to throw it's weight around to gain unfettered access. In
order for the ecosystem of the Arctic to be monitored we need to have ultimate control. I lived in the
Arctic for years and know how easily the ecosystem can be damaged and how long lasting that damage can be. I
have read that the tracks left by Operation Muskox back in the 30's (?) can still be seen across the tundra,
for example. We must be responsible for that ecosystem, and I can't
imagine the Americans or anyone else showing the concern required.

Helga Zbeetneff

Submitted:
Wednesday, March 08, 2006

I think that Canada should stand its
ground. We are one of very few countries
left in the world, that has vast areas
of still unspoiled nature. If Canadians
do not protect these regions,who will?
And, if these waters bordered on another
country, that country would fight for
them as well. Most certainly the US would.

I feel that the US takes Canada and its
policies/claims/views, etc. MUCH too
lightly, and is always looking for one
more issue through which they can
pressure us to "see it their way", thus
not only bringing them one step closer
to access of our land and resources, but
also once more minimizing our
sovereignty over this beautiful country
and its surrounding waters.

doug michalow

Submitted:
Tuesday, March 07, 2006

Canada needs to make a strong stand on
this issue. We need to deploy as many
resources to the area as soon as
possible. Put huge levies/permits on
any ship using it, and not let them
travel the passage, unless there are
at least 6 trained canadians on board,
to guide and monitor the actions of
these ships.
After all it is not a closed system,
like the panama canal.

we should also beef up our military
presence at CFS ALERT. As I think that
this would help signify that we are
serious about the issue.

If we loose the NW Passage what is to
say that we will not loose everything
North of it?

Then what's next Vancouver Island, the
Thousand Islands.

With the changing climate the area is
already going through shock and change.
Why throw any thing else into the
mixture?

Reina

Submitted:
Monday, March 06, 2006

When I think of the Northwest Passage,
I don't think of the future, I think
of the past: Franklin, etc. But I
guess North and South America make a
pretty fomidable wall between Asia and
Europe. I guess the question is, will
the ice actually melt enough for this
to happen? From what the Inuit say,
who are actually there at the ground,
so to speak, it seems likely. And like
any "new" resource, country and
companies (which is more powerful?)
will consider it a free-for-all and
once again a tragedy of the commons
will occur. So yeah, Canada should get
into it, literally. I guess that's the
plan, to send ships, etc, up there.
But not just from a controlling
commerce/military aspect, for the
pollution and environmental
assessments, for the preservation of
local cultures and wildlife. For all
these reasons, Canada needs to claim
without a shadow of a doubt
sovereignty in the North and the
Northwest Passage.