Question of the day: what is 40% of Canada’s landmass, 75% of its coastline, less than 1% of the population… and whose security is at risk?
If you answered the Arctic, you are probably among those who are concerned about its fate. So much the better. The region really needs attention to its immediate future and to strengthening its security.
Another report from Ottawa has just reminded us of this.
After the Auditor General (end of 2022) and a House of Commons committee (in April 2023), it is the turn of a Senate committee to sound the alarm.
The issue of Arctic security and defense must be addressed by the federal government “with all the urgency that the situation requires”, reads this document made public last week.
If these successive pleas did not push the federal government to hasten to review its position in this crucial file, it would be deeply embarrassing.
Why is Arctic security threatened today more than yesterday and – certainly – less than tomorrow?
Let us submit, to illustrate it pictorially, two elements: a number and a date.
First the number: 34.1°C.
This is the temperature it was in Kuujjuaq last Tuesday. The Nunavik village was then the hottest place in Canada!
The event reminds us that the Canadian North is particularly vulnerable to the impacts of climate change. If we talk specifically about the Arctic, the region is warming three times faster than the rest of the planet.
This is a major concern for this territory, those who live there and the infrastructures found there. It also allows us to predict that the Arctic will be more coveted and that activities in the region will continue to intensify.
Now the date: February 24, 2022. That day marked the beginning of Vladimir Putin’s regime’s invasion of Ukraine.
The geopolitical context has changed. The nationalism of major autocratic powers like Russia and China is uninhibited. And these two countries have a definite interest in the Arctic, strategically and economically.
Note that this does not mean that Canada faces an imminent military threat in the Arctic.
But as Chief of the Defense Staff Wayne D. Eyre has pointed out, if we want to guard against possible threats to our sovereignty “in the decades to come”, it is today that needs to be invested.
Several suggestions were made to enhance Canada’s military capabilities to better protect the Arctic.
In their report, the senators placed particular emphasis on the purchase of new submarines. Canada had bought four of them from Great Britain in 1998. They were used and… real lemons.
It is urgent to replace them with submarines that will allow the armed forces to dive under the ice of the Arctic, among other things for surveillance and deterrence.
If this file were to suffer the same fate as that of the CF-18s – which will be replaced by F-35s after endless procrastination – it would be appalling.
The senators offered several other recommendations that directly affect the personnel and equipment needed to keep the Arctic safe.
For example, establishing a follow-up to the modernization process of the North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD), crucial in particular for detecting aerospace threats – and avoiding, we hope, new embarrassing episodes like that of the balloon Chinese.
Or assess whether to change the size, nature or location of Canadian military personnel in the Arctic.
We cannot accuse the federal government of having its arms folded. The 38.6 billion announced for NORAD are proof of this.
That said, it lacks a coherent plan, coupled with a timetable, to persuade us that the fate of the Canadian Arctic is in good hands.