Tag Archives: climate change

Arctic may melt before U.S. ready for northern ocean defense

WASHINGTON–Arctic melting is leaving new coastline and waterways up to the north, but some Arctic strategy experts are concerned that polar ice is melting faster than U.S. military planners are gearing up for what an open-water arctic will mean for U.S. security.

The once-impenetrable Northwest Passage, along the Alaskan and Canadian coast, and the Northeast Passage, along the Russian coast, were both navigable in the summer of 2008.

“If you think strategy relates somehow to means and investment in means then we don’t have a strategy,” said Robert Laird, a security consultant based in Washington and Paris. “You have five stakeholders in the Arctic,” he said. The U.S., Russia, Denmark, Norway and Canada each have Arctic territory. “The only country that’s not strategic in this is us.”

At best, maritime forces will be stretched to cover more coast, patrolling, providing surveillance and rescuing those imperiled at sea over greater territory.

At worst, the U.S. may be drawn into a resource war in which the five Arctic countries hash out territorial claims to seafloor mining of minerals and energy stores, while an even greater number of states advances claims on fishing territory and transportation routes.

“The general rule for oceans is whoever can get there can develop it,” said U.S. Coast Guard Capt. Robert Watts, the Coast Guard service chair at the National War College. “Unless it’s in someone’s (exclusive economic zone), it’s free turf.” Exclusive economic zones are a fixture of international law that entitles countries to develop resources found within 200 miles of their coast.

The U.S. Department of State has an Arctic policy that articulates national security and defense among its principal objectives in the region. And as early as 2001, the Navy was theorizing what its role would be if the Arctic were to become navigable. As “if” became “when,” Navy leaders intensified their studies, in November releasing an “Arctic Roadmap, followed by a “Climate Change Roadmap” in May.

But a report last March from the Congressional Research Service said the Coast Guard’s proposed 2011 budget contains no funding to acquire, build or improve polar icebreakers, the primary vessel for maintaining a U.S. presence in the Arctic.

“We’re not building any assets,” Laird said. “We have a lot of words. We have one functioning ice breaker.”

The Coast Guard, which is a part of the Department of Homeland Security, is responsible for maritime security, search and rescue and law-enforcement functions and owns the three Ice-breaking ships in the U.S. fleet. The Navy, a military branch within the Department of Defense, projects U.S. power abroad. Each have responsibilities for patrolling U.S. coastal waters.

A changing Arctic is likely to influence the future makeup of U.S. Naval forces, said Derek Reveron, a professor of national security affairs at the Naval War College in Newport, Rhode Island. Submarines will no longer be able to hide under permanent ice and if the U.S. role in the Arctic increases, the dominance of the Navy’s staple aircraft carrier may give way to a different fleet makeup, Reveron said.

“At the end of the day,” Reveron said. “The Navy is what it buys.”

Tagged Arctic, climate change, Coast Guard, Navy, Northwest Passage, polar ice cap

U.S. can't delay signing Law of Sea treaty, officials say

WASHINGTON — Despite the support of dozens of well-placed politicians and a majority of voters, Congress appears intent on keeping the United States out of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, the international treaty on seafaring considered crucial to maintaining order in the changing Arctic.

The agreement would give the United States a seat at the negotiating table with the 157 global signatories, and many lawmakers say the international rules are crucial to representing U.S. interests in a melting and increasingly navigable High North.

“I believe we are at a critical time in the Arctic,” said Sen. Lisa Murkowsi (R-Alaska) in an April 28 speech at the Center for Strategic and International Studies . “It has been identified that there are two paths that we can go down in regards to international relations– one is a path of competition and conflict, and the other is one of cooperation and diplomacy. I believe the decision on which path we ultimately take will require dynamic leadership.”

As major Arctic nations and stakeholders begin laying claim to the opening sea lanes and newly accessible resources in the region, the Law of the Sea Treaty offers a way to maintain international order in the budding frontier.

The Law of the Sea, established in 1982, “lays down a comprehensive regime of law and order in the world’s oceans and seas establishing rules governing all uses of the oceans and their resources. It enshrines the notion that all problems of ocean space are closely interrelated and need to be addressed as a whole,” according to the U.N.

The Obama administration is an outspoken supporter of the treaty, as have been the previous two presidents. In fact, the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee recommended the U.S. ratify the treaty with a 17-4 vote in 2007.

But opponents, beginning with President Ronald Reagan, have blocked its passage, saying it gives the U.N. too much control of the world’s oceans—up to 70 percent— and that it threatens U.S. sovereignty on oceans and coastlines.

Today, despite claims by supporters like Murkowski that its passage is urgently needed, the treaty is still waiting for Senate floor time.

The Senate calendar is only one piece of the troubled puzzle. Murkowski said she believes that once the treaty actually receives the floor time, it will take up at least one full week. With only 45 Senate legislative days left this year, and other congressional priorities, there isn’t time for the treaty this year.

“The United States must ratify the treaty but we remain at a stalemate: the White House looks to the Senate to lead and the Senate waits for stronger support from the Administration,” said Murkowski.

The treaty has taken a back seat to immigration and climate change bills and other debates in the House and Senate. To further complicate the political struggle, lawmakers have received hundreds of faxes from grassroots opponents threatening a campaign against anyone who works toward supporting it, said Arne Fuglvog, a legislative assistant to Murkowski.

The Council on Foreign Relations, in a 2009 report, said Washington would be the biggest loser if it fails to ratify the treaty.

“By being the last significant maritime nation in the world to formally join the treaty, the United States is forgoing an opportunity to extend its national jurisdiction over a vast amount of ocean area on its Arctic, Atlantic, and Gulf Coasts–equal to almost half the size of the Louisiana Purchase–while simultaneously abdicating an opportunity to have a say in deliberations over other nation’s claims elsewhere.”

U.S. leaders, including Deputy Secretary of State James Steinberg of the continental shelf and related data collection has been cooperative, and that conflict does not seem imminent.

“The Arctic is kind of a test case of the ability of international community to beat the transnational challenges of the 21^st century,” Steinberg said at the CSIS event.

However, climate change is heightening the urgency to adopt international protocols on the Arctic seas, Steinberg said.

“If we do not act in common,” he said. “Opportunity will become increasingly scarce for all of us.”

Tagged Barack Obama, climate change, Law of the Sea treaty, national security, Sen. Lisa Murkowski

Climate change got EPA’s attention

CHICAGO — The recent volcanic eruption in Iceland brought more impairment than just flight cancellations. The chemicals released from the eruption may endanger the water quality.

How climate change affects water safety received the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s attention even before last fall when officials in the department initiated a “Climate Ready Water Utility” program.

“We think that climate change is a natural evolution of that all hazards approach because our understanding right now with climate change is that its impacts could have direct effects on water quality and quantity and even the infrastructure of water systems, which all could lead to service disruptions,” David Travers, director of the Water Security Division of the EPA, said.

When climate change causes water temperatures to go up, some consequences follow. “Higher temperatures reduce dissolved oxygen levels, which can have an effect on aquatic life. Where streamflow and lake levels fall, there will be less dilution of pollutants,” according to the EPA.

Travers said that after 9/11 the department focused on potential terrorist attacks on water, but the focus has been broadened as the years went by.

“Our definition of what constitutes as threats to infrastructure has grown from terrorism to natural disasters, and today to include climate change,” he said.

Travers said one example of climate change’s impact on water is that it may affect water availability. Since historical records provides good statistics to predict future water availability, the agency expects that the southwestern part of the country will experience severe drought, and it will worsen under the condition of climate change.

The new program will generate a national working group, provide recommendations to local water utilities on how to prepare for climate change, and develop a risk-assessment tool.

Currently, the water security division is in the process of developing software for the risk-assessment tool to be used on computers. And they expect to see some results as early as later this year.

Travers said recent hurricanes and floods are examples of what the weather could do to water, and it is extremely important to prepare beforehand.

“We have seen incidences where water systems have been knocked off line by natural disasters. Preparedness just makes sense as an approach to protect something as critical as water,” Travers said. “I think it’s important to prepare for these types of events. Just because you haven’t gotten into a car accident doesn’t mean that you shouldn’t put down the seat belt.”

Tagged climate change, epa, national security, water security division