Canada called out by Arctic allies Iceland, Finland and Sweden frustrated at non-invitations to Arctic summit. By Carl Meyer Published February 17, 2010

View story Email Comments To the Editor

Canada's decision to host a special meeting of select circumpolar nations next month has angered three European nations who fear they've been shut out of the summit for geopolitical reasons.

On March 29, Canada will host a conference of foreign ministers from the five Arctic Ocean coastal states in Chelsea, Que., hours before the opening of a G8 foreign ministers meeting in nearby Gatineau.

The five states—Canada, the United States, Russia, Norway and Denmark—are all members of the Arctic Council, an international forum created in 1996 to foster co-operation amongst Arctic states and indigenous populations.

However, the other three permanent members of the council—Sweden, Finland and Iceland—have not been invited to the Chelsea conference, ostensibly because they do not possess coastlines with the Arctic Ocean.

But in separate interviews with Embassy, officials from all three have expressed concerns that the Chelsea conference will threaten the existence of the Arctic Council and the larger notion of a global Arctic consensus.

At least two were also frustrated by a lack of explanation from Canadian officials.

"We have not heard any explanation we could understand as to what the issues are that Canada wants to discuss in that restrictive framework," said Sweden's senior Arctic official, Helena Ödmark, reached by telephone in Stockholm.

"We worry that it will have negative effects, of course, and we don't want to see that. We told the Canadians that, but we haven't really gotten a very good reply. We do see quite a risk of having this kind of a meeting and not being able to explain what the issues are."

Iceland's foreign affairs spokesperson, Urður Gunnarsdóttir, told Embassy that "Iceland is concerned and believes that the proposed meeting might undermine the importance of the Arctic Council."

She also confirmed that, like Sweden, "we have as of now not been presented with any arguments in support of the Canadian arrangement."

And Finnish Foreign Affairs Minister Alexander Stubb, in Ottawa last week to meet with Foreign Affairs Minister Lawrence Cannon, stressed that the full Arctic Council should be "the primary player in the region."

"I'm not a big fan of the coastal states meeting, I'm a big fan of the Arctic Council.... You always prefer to sit around the table where the decisions are taken," said Mr. Stubb, although he later stressed that Finland is "not going to point the finger at anyone."

The Canadian government has also recently received a harsh rebuke from indigenous groups after they were not invited to the Chelsea conference.

Foreign Affairs and International Trade spokesperson Alain Cacchione insisted that "there is no desire on Canada's part to duplicate the Arctic Council's agenda or call into question the work it is currently undertaking."

"This meeting of the Arctic Ocean coastal states is a ministerial-level discussion between states that have unique interests in and responsibilities for the Arctic Ocean. The results of this meeting can help to reinforce the work of the Arctic Council," Mr. Cacchione said.

The department says Mr. Cannon reassured Mr. Stubb that Canada is "committed to the Arctic Council" and that the council will be "formally debriefed on the results of the Arctic Ocean Foreign Ministers meeting."

Mr. Cacchione also noted that "at this point in time, the agenda for the March meeting is being developed to focus on issues of particular relevance to the Arctic Ocean coastal states."

Second meeting of Arctic Five

When the government announced the Chelsea conference on Feb. 3, Mr. Cannon said it "will reinforce ongoing collaboration in the region, including in the Arctic Council."

But the conference will be the second meeting of Arctic Ocean coastal states after a May 28, 2008 meeting in Ilulissat, Greenland. The Canadian move to host a second meeting thus solidifies the worry held by many that these five-nation Arctic Ocean summits are now the norm.

The Ilulissat conference produced a declaration stating that its members saw "no need to develop a new comprehensive international legal regime to govern the Arctic Ocean," preferring to adhere instead to the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), which Canada ratified on Nov. 6, 2003.

UNCLOS allows for countries to extend their sovereignty 200 nautical miles to a baseline derived from a calculation based on the ending of the continental shelf. Signatories have a 10-year time limit in which to provide data to the UN proving the physical nature of their continental shelf.

Those who can assert their rights over a slice of the Arctic become heir to its hidden riches. A study last spring by the US Geological Survey indicated that the Arctic contains as much as 13 per cent of world oil deposits and 30 per cent of world natural gas deposits.

As well, a recently completed government-funded Arctic climate study concluded that Arctic ice is melting faster than expected. The opening of Arctic sea routes to commercial shipping would change the face of international trade.

Canada has been embarking on several of these expeditions already. In the latest example, an unmanned vehicle will begin mapping the Arctic sea floor next month after launching near the western tip of the Queen Elizabeth Islands.

The Ilulissat conference followed the Aug. 2, 2007 stunt by Russia of planting flags at the seabed beneath the North Pole, which famously provoked then-foreign affairs minister Peter MacKay into saying: "You can't go around the world and just plant flags and say 'we're claiming this territory.'"

Russia was also accused by the Department of National Defence of flying bomber sorties over the Arctic airspace during the Feb. 18, 2009 visit by US President Barack Obama to Ottawa.

All of this worries the non-coastal Arctic Council states, some of whom believe that a global intertwining of resources, climate and trade render them vulnerable to Arctic policy.

"Iceland has vested interests in the Arctic Ocean as a coastal state whose livelihood is based on the sustainable exploitation of marine resources," said Ms. Gunnarsdóttir.

"The waters surrounding Iceland are interlinked with the Arctic Ocean via currents and migrating fish stocks. All decisions on issues concerning the Arctic Ocean can therefore directly influence the livelihood and security of Icelanders."

As for Sweden, Ms. Ödmark was perturbed by the lack of answers.

"Well that gives some perspective, doesn't it. I mean, you are asking questions, of course. And others are asking questions. And they cannot give a reply. This is not a very good way of proceeding," she said.

"This Canadian invitation to some of the countries, to discuss some unknown issues, that we're not quite clear on exactly what or which, that causes confusion."

cmeyer@embassymag.ca