Re: U.S. Embassador; "Canada has no claim to Arctic Wat
Good work Sanch. Now we can start talking facts.
sanch said:
Good work Sanch. Now we can start talking facts.
sanch said:
Fair enough, but what happens when borders overlap? If country A and country B claim sovereignty over C, and they both have the right to defend their sovereignty, you can see there's a problem. That's how wars start!
FiveParadox said:On this issue, I would support the Honourable Stephen Harper. We should stand up for ourselves on the world stage; the Arctic islands and waters north of our mainland are Canadian, as far as I am concerned. We should ensure that they remain rightly so.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/ArticleNews/TPStory/LAC/20060127/REALITY27/TPNationalWho is right on Arctic sovereignty?By BILL CURRY
Friday, January 27, 2006 Page A4
OTTAWA -- The issue: Prime-minister-designate Stephen Harper and U.S. Ambassador David Wilkins are at odds over whether Canada has sovereignty over the waters between the Arctic islands.
The facts: The dispute between Canada and foreign countries, particularly the United States, over Arctic sovereignty has gone on for decades.
Canada says the waters have long been used by the country's Inuit, who gave their support to Canada's sovereignty claims in the 1993 Nunavut Land Claims Agreement.
The United States and others insist that while the islands belong to Canada, they are surrounded by international waters.
Advertisements
The shrinking polar ice cap, as well as the fact that the Arctic ice is thinner than it once was, has opened up the prospect of the Northwest Passage becoming a major shipping route between Asia and Europe.
Such a route through the Arctic islands would be 7,000 kilometres shorter than the current passage through the Panama Canal.
University of British Columbia professor Michael Byers, who, along with University of Montreal professor Suzanne Lalonde, directs a project on Arctic sovereignty and the Northwest Passage, called Mr. Harper's rebuke to Mr. Wilkins -- over U.S. failure to recognize Canada's Arctic sovereignty --"remarkable."
Mr. Byers had been recommending that Canada install an icebreaker on each side of the northern coast well before Mr. Harper's recent campaign promise to buy icebreakers. He said Mr. Harper's plan would go a long way toward boosting Canada's sovereignty claim.
The professor said that there has yet to be a concrete international agreement dealing with the status of the waters.
"The honest answer is, it's a dispute," he said. "With sovereignty, you either use it or you lose it."
Mr. Byers noted that a Russian-flagged icebreaking cruise ship, the Kapitan Khlebnikovi, is already sailing the Northwest Passage. It charges passengers about $10,000 (U.S.) for the northern journey and visits Inuit communities during the summer.
The real threat, according to Mr. Myers, is that shipping vessels will start using the passage in violation of Canadian environmental laws if Canada is unable to patrol the region. The two Arctic experts also recommend the imposition of mandatory registration for ships entering Arctic waters, a system already used off of Canada's Atlantic coast. And they call for radar to be installed at the entrances to the Northwest Passage.
The Liberal government increased its surveillance of the Arctic, through electronic methods and northern military exercises.
Speaking in late 2004, former U.S. ambassador Paul Cellucci hinted the United States may be willing to recognize Canada's claims to the Northwest Passage if it helps U.S. security.
"We are looking at everything through the terrorism prism," he said. "Our top priority is to stop the terrorists. So perhaps when this is brought to the table again, we may have to take another look."
Mr. Byers said he viewed the comments as an invitation from the U.S. State Department to renegotiate the issue.
"I think [Mr. Harper's] position actually lines up with the long-term interests of the United States," he said.
Well the de-facto recognized national waters boundary is 200 miles
You may be thinking of claimed Economic Zone.
Territorial waters extend 12 nm. [edit: nautical miles]
Thanks to NavVet for this description of "innocent passage"...
There are probably parts of the passage that Canada can claim sovreignty over, however, there is still the principal known as "innocent passage" If necessary to pass between two bodies of international waters, a foreign nation's shipping, including warships can transit as long as they are just transiting. They can't stop and do manuvers, exercises etc. It is like an international easment. If a foreign ship is doing more than "innocent passage" the nation with the territorial claim can order them to leave or take action if they don't. However, one of the fundamental principals of innocent passage is that you don't have to get permission as long as you comply with the law.
This is a classic scripted confrontation to make Harper look to Canadians like he's standing up to the US.
It's probably what he and Shrub were talking about on the phone.
Harper gets to justify buying military toys for the Navy, look like he's being tough, patrol the Arctic for the US so they don't have to, while granting them whatever access they want (but on OUR terms *wink,wink*).
It's perfect.
I've come upon an interesting take on the situation. This one's for all of you conspiracy guys, however in this day and age anything could be expected.