| Submit your comments on this article | |||
| Great White North | |||
| U.S. sub may have toured Canadian Arctic zone | |||
| 2005-12-19 | |||
| A U.S. nuclear submarine cruised through the Arctic Ocean last month -- probably passing through Canadian territorial waters -- but the federal government is refusing to say whether it gave permission for the voyage. However, experts say it is highly unlikely Canada was even notified of the USS Charlotte's northern tour, which included a Nov. 10 stop at the North Pole, because it has no way of tracking what goes on beneath the Arctic ice. And that could threaten Canada's claim to hundreds of thousands of square kilometres of the North, including the Northwest Passage route across the Arctic, said Michael Byers, who holds the Canada research chair in global politics and international law at the University of British Columbia. "This is very important -- it's crucial," he said. "Any unauthorized passage could have a serious effect on our claim." Prof. Byers said potentially lucrative oil and gas resources off the Queen Elizabeth Islands could slip out of Canadian control if foreign navies are operating in the Arctic without our permission. "The fact of the matter is that we've spent nothing on Arctic sovereignty over the past 20 years." Pierre Leblanc, a retired colonel and former commander of the Canadian Forces' northern command, said foreign submarines have been travelling through the Canadian Arctic for decades, but the federal government usually finds out about it only by accident. He said the nations controlling the submarines -- the Americans, British and French -- usually do not tell Canada when their vessels enter the Arctic. "We're relying on their goodwill to know if they're in our waters or not." The latest underwater trip through the Arctic came just before the federal election call last month. USS Charlotte, a Los Angeles-class fast attack submarine, left its home base in Pearl Harbor, sailed through the Bering Strait between Alaska and Russia and cruised under the Arctic ice pack to the pole. The nuclear-powered sub spent more than 24 hours at the top of the world, giving its 154 crew members the chance to walk on the windswept ice and even play a quick football game in the -45C temperatures.
Col. Leblanc doubts the Americans informed the Canadian government of the trip, let alone sought permission for it. "I don't think they told us a thing: I don't think they told anyone," he said. "In the submarine world, they don't tell anyone anything about where they go or when they go there unless they have to."
Lieutenant-Commander John Coppard, a spokesman for the Canadian navy, would not say whether the U.S. sub strayed into Canadian territory, nor would he confirm whether the Americans sought our permission if so, or even notified Ottawa if the sub was to sail through the Canadian part of the Arctic. "We do not discuss the movements of allied [nations'] submarines," he said, adding: "One would expect that a naval vessel transiting Canadian waters would seek the appropriate diplomatic clearances." However, Rodney Moore, a spokesman for Foreign Affairs, said any notification would have come through military channels. "It probably wouldn't come to us and we wouldn't comment on it even if it did," he said. "If anyone had it, it would be DND [the Department of National Defence]." David Rudd, the president of the Canadian Institute of Strategic Studies, said successive federal governments have for decades pursued a policy he describes as "out of sight, out of mind." "It's an unspoken policy of willful ignorance," he said. "If the public doesn't know about it, they're not going to agitate for more spending to monitor the North and protect our sovereignty. And serious surveillance of the North is a very expensive proposition." Prof. Byers said Canada has only five small and ageing icebreakers, none of which is capable of operating year-round. "We have the longest coastline in the world, much of which is under ice for most of the year, and we don't even have an all-weather icebreaker," he said. "We don't even have a federal government helicopter north of 60 -- not a single one."
Col. Leblanc said Canada is not even spending the bare minimum on northern sovereignty. While he was military commander in the North, he said even the handful of flights over the vast Arctic territory claimed by Canada were cut sharply. "The number of planned observation flights in 2000 was zero. In '99, there were two," he said. "And this is for an area the size of Europe." "We don't have any idea what's going on up there." | |||
| Posted by:Steve White |
| #12 "We're relying on their goodwill to know if they're in our waters or not." The maybe it would behoove the Canuck gov't to project a little goodwill towards us. The way the Canadian gov't has treated us the last few years, I can't imagine why they think we have any "goodwill" for them left. The best they can hope for is "indifferentwill." |
| Posted by: Barbara Skolaut 2005-12-19 23:11 |
| #11 Well, the Canadians were going to do something about it, but then the rope snapped when the crew tried to start the Evinrude, and the cook forgot to bring the Subway coupons, and then .. |
| Posted by: mrp 2005-12-19 21:38 |
| #10 This article is stupid. The issue here is the right of passage through so called international straits. More or less defined as a body of water which needs to be crossed to reach one area of international waters from another or the port of third country. The USA maintains it has an unrestricted right to transit these passges without impediment. Other countries maintain they can restrict vessels transiting them for example by searching the ships. It has bugger all to do with soveriegnty. |
| Posted by: phil_b 2005-12-19 19:09 |
| #9 *ahem* correction: If you want to play, you've got to PAY. My bad. |
| Posted by: Alaska Paul 2005-12-19 18:02 |
| #8 He said the nations controlling the submarines -- the Americans, British and French -- usually do not tell Canada when their vessels enter the Arctic. "We're relying on their goodwill to know if they're in our waters or not." That isn't a problem, it's a feature. The only real base that the Canadians have, besides the radar sites on the northern coasts, is Alert, which is more of a listening post. The Canadians do a bunch of Continental Shelf research projects every year, with much of the support out of Resolute (on Cornwallis Island). I guess that is how they justify their claim. The only inhabited village north of Resolute is Griese Fjord on the south end of Ellesmere Island. Cool place, but toward the end of the world. Then you have a weather station at Eureka, and maybe someone still at Mould Bay to the west. All in all pretty sparsely inhabited. And no resources to enforce sovereignty. If you want to play, you've got to play. Flew up to Resolute in 1990, still my fartherst north aircraft oil change at Latitude 75 deg N. Used HF radio and sun compass (was near the magnetic N pole, so mag compasses are useless). Got a cool poster from Northern Transportation Company, Ltd, the barge co. up there. It is called "Our Northern Point of View." Check out the website: http://www.ntcl.com/ Then click on the tab that says, "Route Map." A pictorial view that you do not see in most places. |
| Posted by: Alaska Paul 2005-12-19 18:00 |
| #7 And the real, real sad note is that Canada once had one of the five beaches in Normandy - Juno. Socialism sucks the heart out of another culture. |
| Posted by: Chonter Uneamble8668 2005-12-19 17:08 |
| #6 |
| Posted by: BigEd 2005-12-19 15:12 |
| #5 WTF? Who do the Canadian's think will actually protect their sovereignty if it's threatened? The CAF? Your kidding right? It will be us down here using a frw of these nuclear subs, eh. Professors of TRANZI nonsense and newsies with too much time on their hands. |
| Posted by: Mahou Sensei Negi-bozu 2005-12-19 15:10 |
| #4 "The fact of the matter is that we've spent nothing on Arctic sovereignty over the past 20 years." Thats right mate, but Arctic sovereignty isn't the only thing you've neglected. Your socialist gov't has nearly destroyed a once proud Canadian military. You've been hiding under the American defense cover for at least 50 years or so, spending your money on social welfare and give-away programs for foreigners. |
| Posted by: Besoeker 2005-12-19 15:06 |
| #3 I'm trying to figure out how a US submarine is supposed to make a port visit to Halifax WITHOUT passing through Canadian territorial waters. I also would have thought that previous mutual defense agreements would have covered this sort of exercise without jeapordizing Canada's sovereignity any more than the NATO training exercises at Goose Bay do. |
| Posted by: Halliburton/KBR Levitating Submarine DIvision 2005-12-19 14:59 |
| #2 Well, it's not like they could do anything aboot it, anyway, is it? |
| Posted by: mojo 2005-12-19 14:47 |
| #1 As an ex-submariner, this is funniest article I ever read here. Like US submarine transits are a threat to Canada's claim for its arctic islands. If anything, they are the guarantee that those Islands will always belong to Canada! Even if the they joined the gathering horde of Western hemisphere commies, I doubt we would even care. All it means is we'll have to build another couple of fences, (Alaska-Canada too). Which we should get cheap after they build the first one on the Southern border. And hell, they did a port visit to Halifax! That's money in people's pockets. Gladly given, I might add. What a non-issue. |
| Posted by: Penguin 2005-12-19 14:07 |