Submarines, Oil Tankers, and Icebreakers
| Published date | 01 December 2011 |
| DOI | 10.1177/002070201106600410 |
| Date | 01 December 2011 |
| Subject Matter | I. Issues |
| International Journal | Autumn 2011 | 809 |
Rob Huebert
Submarines,
oil tankers, and
icebreakers
Trying to understand Canadian Arctic sovereignty and security
Canadian policymakers, academics, and the general public have long had a
fascination with the Arctic. It resonates in Canada’s culture and in its national
identity, and it can even be found in the English version of the Canadian
national anthem. There is little doubt that Canadians see themselves as a
northern people—even if the vast majority live along a narrow band along its
southernmost border. The harsh climate and resulting ice conditions have
meant that Canadians have been able to believe that few have challenged
Canadian claims to have its secure and sovereign Arctic. As climate change
begins to open the Arctic to the international community, Canadian
policymakers and academics are wrestling with new requirements, and there
is a tendency to look to the past to determine the response to the future.1
Rob Huebert is an associate professor of political science and the associate director of the
centre for military and strategic studies at the University of Calgary.
1 P. W. Lackenbauer, “From polar race to polar saga: An integrated strategy for Canada
and the circumpolar world,” Foreign policy for Canada’s tomorrow no. 3, Canadian
International Council, Toronto, July 2009.
| 810 | Autumn 2011 | International Journal |
| Rob Huebert |
Both the academic discourse and the existing policy framework are based
on the twin assumptions that the main international issue facing Canada is
with regard to challenges to its sovereignty and that these are generally from
the US.
But what if this narrative has missed significant elements of the full
picture? What if important events, actions, or realities simply were missed
or ignored by the government, academics, and the general public? Could
such omissions skew Canadian understanding of this important issue?
Could they undermine the existing framework that now exists?
This article contends that there has been such an omission. From the
early 1960s onward, American (and possibly French and British) and Soviet
submarines played deadly games of cat and mouse in and around the Arctic
Ocean.2 Both the maintenance of nuclear deterrence and the conduct of war
if deterrence failed depended heavily on what happened within the Arctic
maritime regions.3 Although fundamentally important to Canadian security
and welfare, very little of this seems to have entered the deliberations of
Canadian policymakers. If the government could not see it, it did not exist.
This omission is also notable in the academic discourse on the Arctic. Very
few studies have attempted to integrate the actions of submarines into the
greater understanding of Canadian policy.4
However, any effort to better understand the impact that this element
of the Cold War had on Canada is shrouded in secrecy. Very little is known
publicly. Therefore it is impossible to know with any degree of certainty what
did happen (and what may still be happening). While this issue seems to be
relevant only for the past, the current efforts of those who have developed
and built nuclear-powered submarines—the US, Russia, UK, France,
and China, and those who plan to build nuclear-power submarines, like
India—suggest that Canadian officials must not become complacent. The
commitment of these states to dedicate substantial resources to retaining
this capability points to the perceived utility of nuclear-powered submarines.
Given the geographic position of the Arctic Ocean it is unlikely that some
2 Norman Polmar & Kenneth J. Moore, The Design and Construction of US and Soviet
Submarines (Dulles, VA: Brassey’s Inc., 2004).
3 Sanjay Chaturvedi, The Polar Regions: A Political Geography (London: J. Wiley, 1996).
4 W. Harriet Critchley, “Polar depolyment of Soviet submarines,” International Journal
39, no. 4 (autumn 1984): 828-65; W. Harriet Critchley, “The Arctic,” International
Journal 42, no. 4 (autumn 1987): 769-88.
To continue reading
Request your trial