Commentary
The Distant Early Warning Line (
DEW Line) runs north of the Arctic Circle from Alaska in the west to Baffin Island in the east, then continues across Greenland. It was built by the United States, with the cooperation of Canada, at the height of the Cold War in the 1950s as a defence against the Soviet Union.
Most of the self-sufficient bases on this
line had a paved runway, with equipment and personnel necessary to keep the runway cleared. The bases had to be operational for the dozens of fighter planes that were kept at the ready by U.S. Strategic Air Command, in case Soviet jets came over the North Pole.
Most of those sites fell into disuse, and the DEW Line became the
North Warning System. Not much has happened since then. Although the federal government has promised to address the deterioration of our defences, nothing of substance has been done by Ottawa to deal more effectively with the
defence of our vast North. Similarly, although the government has promised to
modernize its NORAD (North American Aerospace Defence Command) commitments, it has been largely ignored.
The Trump administration has made it clear that it finds Canada’s defence
readiness to be unacceptable. The complaint is legitimate.
The fact is that the world is very different from what it looked like in the 1950s and 60s. At that time, the Soviet Union was the major threat to the West, while communist China was desperately poor and weak. Under Mao’s “Great Leap Forward” and later his “
Cultural Revolution,” millions starved. China looked then more like North Korea than the economic and military behemoth it has become today. We certainly didn’t fear it as a threat.
Now, both communist China, and an increasingly aggressive Russia are formidable foes. They are also very interested in the North. Ominously, they have recently partnered with each other in a “
friendship without limits” which raises the possibility that they might collaborate (or be collaborating right now) on joint plans for the military and commercial exploitation of the North.
The fact that shipping on a large scale through the Northwest Passage might be a possibility in the not-so-distant future is one of the reasons why. The passage can cut shipping distances drastically, so huge amounts of money and fuel can be saved. Future passage from Asia to Europe via the Northeast Passage (also called the Northern Sea Route) and Northwest Passage would be incredibly valuable—strategically, militarily and commercially—for both Russia and China.
Russia is far ahead of Canada on northern strategy and development. It has at least 40 ships capable of breaking through ice, including eight nuclear-powered
icebreakers. Canada has no icebreakers that are nuclear powered. Recent promises to
build two are years away from fruition. The Americans are acutely aware of Russia’s northern superiority.
Northern security goes some way to explaining Donald Trump’s very public offer to buy Greenland. Whether he is serious about buying it, or just wants better access guarantees, is something known only to Trump and his closest advisers.
The prospect of Greenland falling under the control of its adversaries (and possible future enemies) must alarm the Pentagon. Is such a prospect remote? Consider the fact that there are only 56,000 Greenlanders. China and Russia, separately or jointly, could make each Greenlander a millionaire with $56 billion. That is a small sum for those giants. Is it not possible that America wants to get to Greenlanders with an offer first? After all, Denmark has assured the Greenlanders that they can become independent with a simple vote. The prospect of becoming millionaires might have strong appeal to the relatively poor indigenous inhabitants of that huge, cold island. Trump’s concerns about the security of his nation are very real. He probably sees preventing China or Russia (separately or as a combined force) from gaining control of Greenland as absolutely vital.
More likely than bribing Greenlanders, Chinese Communist Party-controlled corporations could gain a foothold in Greenland by making attractive offers to the inhabitants, as the CCP has done throughout the developing world with its
Belt and Road Initiative. The days of European empires, with Europeans waving attractive trinkets in the faces of poor natives, have been replaced with today’s savvy Chinese businessmen doing essentially the same thing.
But a glance at the map shows how close Greenland is to Canada. Trump probably has many of the same concerns about the vast, largely undefended Canadian Arctic that he has about Greenland. And some of Canada’s recent actions are probably causing alarm in the Trump camp.
An example might be the
ceding of partial sovereignty by Canada to Nunavut. Nunavut is a huge land mass. Like Greenland, it is rich in natural resources, particularly natural gas. And, like Greenland, it is also strategically important.
Nunavut sits smack dab on a Northwest Passage that might be worth trillions of dollars in the future. Who controls the passage could turn out to be a determining factor in whether the West, or “no-limits” China/Russia, will be the victor in future Great Power struggles. Like Greenland, Nunavut has a small population, about 38,000 mainly poor Inuit people. The
Foreign Interference Commission has been clear that besides targeting governments at different levels, foreign actors also try to exploit indigenous communities.
We have seen how important the issue of CCP control of the Panama Canal is to the Americans. The possibility of China/Russia control of the Northwest Passage could well be equally important to them. Not to be alarmist, but shouldn’t the fact that that China has already—very quietly—been making huge
deals with semi-autonomous indigenous territories concern Canadians as well?
Will semi-autonomous Nunavut decide that their consent is required to use the passage, perhaps even from Canadian vessels? Now that United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) has become law in Canada, could indigenous people in these semi-autonomous indigenous territories assert tribal law that would trump other laws? If you think this is too far-fetched, consider that fact that our Supreme Court has already held that tribal law cancels Charter protections in some cases, and even held that indigenous people who are not Canadian citizens and do not live in Canada can have rights to Canadian resources. How does the United States view such giveaways of Canadian sovereignty to indigenous groups?
Nunavut is not the only part of Canada that is being ceded, or partially ceded, to indigenous groups. In British Columbia,
Haida Gwaii (formerly Queen Charlotte Islands) looks like it will have a status similar to Nunavut.
BC’s government seems determined to
give other parts of the province over to the many First Nations who live there as well. Each would presumably be able to make their own laws, and make commercial agreements with whomever they choose. That would include CCP-controlled companies.
There will no doubt be protective provisions in those agreements, but B.C. has adopted the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act (
DRIPA). A double whammy of DRIPA and UNDRIP might arm indigenous groups with effective weapons to assert sovereignty, even in the face of government opposition. Canadian courts have been amazingly
willing to give indigenous groups what they want. What are the chances that Haida Gwaii separatists are even now planning business deals with CCP-controlled corporations that will make Washington—and should make Ottawa—extremely uncomfortable?
How will the Trump, or future administrations, see these developments? Will Americans tolerate a British Columbia, or a Canada, that cedes its sovereignty to people who are increasingly being urged to see themselves not as British Columbians or Canadians but as victims of a “colonizing” Canada? Or how does the United States regard a Canada that closes its eyes to
human smuggling on semi-autonomous Mohawk border reserves? Americans see their security being compromised.
Under pressure from the United States, Canada is only now promising to build more
icebreakers and improve northern defence.
A federal election is in the offing. A prime minister will be chosen. His or her new government will negotiate agreements with the United States that will undoubtedly include doing things we should have done long ago: enhancing our northern defence, meeting our NATO commitments, and rebuilding our dilapidated armed forces. Our political leaders will also be forced to do a major rethink on all matters relating to North American security.
Trump, or any American president, would not even think of giving away sovereignty as Canada is doing so casually. As we think about security, perhaps this is a good time for Canada to work closely with indigenous communities to strengthen Arctic defence, ensuring that all regions remain integrated within a unified security framework.
Views expressed in this article are opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times.
