Congressman Rick Larsen gave a keynote addresses at last week’s fifth annual Arctic Encounter Symposium, the theme of which was “The Future of Arctic Security: Energy, Environment, International, Economic.”

Larsen connected Washington State’s economy with its northern neighbor of Alaska and called for the prioritization of Arctic policy. Larsen addressed environmental concerns, national security, and the need for increased infrastructure in the Arctic, which have national impacts.

“It is a national issue for the US, the Arctic. And over the years I’ve worked to bring a little bit more attention to this part of the world that might be out of sight and out of mind for many, unless you’re perhaps from Alaska or from Washington State. But it’s certainly part of the everyday economy here in the Pacific Northwest. As an example, local shipyards are often the winter home for maintenance and repair on the fishing vessels and other vessels that operate in Alaskan waters during the warmer months, as well as playing a key part in recapitalizing the Alaskan fishing fleet… It’s a national interest, and not just the interest of only a handful of the states or institutions.”

Arctic sea ice has retreated over the past 30 years, which opens up the Arctic Ocean for increased maritime activity. Larsen argues that increased opportunity in shipping and resource extraction in the Arctic has “magnified the need for effective and coherent regulations on industry in the Arctic.”

In addition to industry regulations, Larsen wants to see investments in the nation’s security and defense opportunities in the Arctic in response to increased international activity in the region.

“According to the Department of Defense 2016 Arctic Strategy Report, these investments must include better remote sensing, ice predicting, weather forecasting, communications, ground transportation, navigational aids, and infrastructure… However, the [Trump] Administration’s 2017 National Security Strategy failed to address how the US will tackle security concerns that climate change poses, including other concerns as well by the increased international maritime access in the Arctic, especially in the waters that the US controls. In addition, the 2018 National Defense Strategy fails to mention the Arctic. Hopefully the Department of Defense can start to address these oversights and concerns in the Navy’s updated Arctic strategy that will be released this summer as they address blue water operations in the Arctic.”

Larsen noted the need to be aware of and partially respond to Russian and Chinese activities in the Arctic but cautioned against responding to Russia’s actions instead of US needs.

“So as sea ice continues to retreat, more vessels will attempt to transit the Arctic. And ironically, that doesn’t mean we need fewer ice breakers, it means we need more presence of ice breakers in the Arctic to deal with the uncertainty that comes with receding ice and those times of years when the ice expands. So, we know that Russia is investing heavily in ice breakers, which some commentators have pointed to as a justification for increased investment. I think that’s frankly a mistake. Russia has different interests in their portion of the Arctic. We have our interests in our portion of the Arctic. Russia has a larger population, a longer coastline. However US ice breaker policy should not be driven by an arms race as much as it should be driven by our own needs and unfortunately, we don’t have the ice breaking capability to meet our needs in the Arctic. That’s why I’ve supported a fleet of 3 heavies and 3 medium ice breakers consistent with Coast Guard recommendations…

Although competition in the Arctic is increasing, it still remains relatively free of conflict. Sure, we have to pay attention in increased Russian military activity and we have to pay attention to competition for natural resources. We’ve stay focused on increased Chinese interests in the Arctic. After all, in January China drafted a white paper on the Arctic, plans on using the Arctic as an important part of its Belt Road Initiative known as the Polar Silk Road. But still, the US must continue to focus our efforts on diplomacy and on the Arctic Council.”

Your support matters.

Public service journalism is important today as ever. If you get something from our coverage, please consider making a donation to support our work. Thanks for reading our stuff.