Abstract
Reviewed by: Rob Huebert, University of Calgary
John English’s Ice and Water provides an important albeit frustrating addition to our understanding of the process that is changing international Arctic governance. It offers important insights into the Canadian efforts to create and promote the Arctic Council, presenting outstanding evidence and an insider’s understanding of the intrigues involved. English examines in detail some of the most important phases of the creation of the Arctic Council. The book correctly focuses on the emphasis placed on the participation of northern Indigenous Peoples and in particular Canadian northern Indigenous Peoples.
However, readers who lack a detailed understanding of the region and its politics may find the book confusing. First, it is mistitled. It claims to be an examination of the creation of the Arctic Council. While it does provide important insights into its creation, its real focus is the central role played by several Canadian individuals and nongovernment organizations. This is really a book about Mary Simon, Franklyn Griffiths, and a number of other key Canadian officials. It is also about the role played by the Gordon Foundation. There is no question that they each deserve tremendous praise for their effort and perseverance in helping to create the Arctic Council, which, without them, would likely not exist today. But this is not what English’s book claims to do: its stated purpose “is a history of the Arctic Council, a study of how a 21st century institution has roots in the human, ecological, and political developments of the most northern region of the planet” (12).
This promise is at odds with English’s methodology. He focuses on the role of the individual. While this is an acceptable means of assessing the creation of international institutions, it is necessary to ensure that the individuals selected are not presented as caricatures. Yet it becomes evident that English has a much more positive regard for individuals associated with the Liberal Party of Canada. The Arctic Council is a very important achievement in Canadian foreign policy, but it was built on a bipartisan basis. One may take issue with the contents of that support, but there is little question that from Brian Mulroney’s first proposal of the Arctic Council in 1989 to Jean Chrétien’s success in gaining American acceptance of the idea in 1996, individuals from all sides of the Canadian political spectrum have been involved and supportive. Thus, English’s tendency to portray Liberal supporters in much more sympathetic terms prevents a more nuanced understanding of the motives of all those involved.
The book also discounts or completely ignores some critical actors. One reason for the Arctic Council’s success is its working groups and task force. These bodies, initiated by the Arctic Environmental Protection Strategy and carried over into the Arctic Council, provided the continuity, expertise, and substance of much of the council’s early work. As with the council itself, each body was created and supported through the work of key individuals. Furthermore, many of these individuals were Canadian. A chapter examining and explaining what these working groups and task force did is needed. Readers need to know that Fred Roots was instrumental in setting up the very powerful Arctic Monitoring Program and that Jeanne Pagnan was critical to the success of Conservation of Arctic Flora and Fauna working group. Others such as Bernie Funston and Russel Shearer are left out. Perhaps even more problematic is the complete omission of the critically important role Leslie Whitby played in the foundation of the task group on sustainable development. Instead, the reader is only told in the vaguest terms of some dispute that Whitby had with Simon, implying that Whitby was at fault (which in the view of this reviewer is both unfair to Whitby and not the whole story). All these individuals played critically important roles in the successful creation of the working groups that in turn led to the ability of the Arctic Council to act.
Moving beyond English’s methodology, there are two omissions that will create problems for readers who lack an understanding of the critical challenges in the council’s creation. English is absolutely right that the role played by northern indigenous leaders, and those who supported them, was key to the creation of the Arctic Council. However, English does not explain to the reader what northern indigeneity means. What does it mean to be a northern indigenous person? What is the difference between a northern indigenous person and a northerner? Is there a difference in how this is to be recognized in the identification of who is to play a role as an indigenous person in the Arctic Council? The Arctic Council was the first international body to explicitly recognize Indigenous Peoples’ rights to participate in such a forum, so what is it that is being recognized? Since this is central to English’s otherwise excellent narrative on the incorporation of northern indigenous voices, the omission of a definition of northern indigeneity is problematic.
A second problem is the book’s handling of security issues. Once again, this is a direct function of the individuals and organizations interviewed. There is a clear focus on the important contributions of many Canadians to attempts to demilitarize the Arctic and how demilitarization connects to the formation of the Arctic Council. The problem is that this focus creates a biased picture of what was happening in the Arctic and, by extension, what the Arctic Council could and should do regarding national security. The impression created is that nothing else is being done to demilitarize the region. English suggests that, at the end of the Cold War, the Americans, the Norwegians, and the Mulroney government remained “locked in a Cold War mentality,” and that no efforts to conduct serious demilitarization on a multilateral basis were occurring. This is simply wrong. For example, the Arctic Military Environmental Cooperation Program was an arrangement in which the US, Norway, and subsequently the UK provided extensive economic and technical assistance to the Russian government in the safe and proper decommissioning of the former Soviet fleet of nuclear-powered submarines that were being allowed to rot in Russian harbours. This was agreed to in 1996, so the suggestion that nothing was being done is untrue, but it was being done on a parallel path. Canada was invited to join but declined. However, in 2002, thanks to an initiative by the Chrétien Liberals, Canada, through the G8, decided to contribute significantly to assisting the Russians to decommission their submarines.
English’s book considerably expands our knowledge of the role played by a number of specific Canadians in the creation of the Arctic Council. That said, it does not tell the whole story; nor does it provide readers new to the subject with an effective introduction to what the Arctic Council is and what it does. But for readers who are already familiar with the multilateral efforts toward international governance in the Arctic, this book is an important addition to their library.