bout de papier, Vol. 6, No. 3 (1988), pp. 44–45
Arctic Imperative, Is Canada Losing the
North? by J. Honderich, University of
Toronto Press, 1987, 285 pp. $24.95
In August 1986, John Honderich, a lawyer and editorial page editor for the Toronto Star, took a leave of absence to bring together his two fascinations, the Arctic, and strategic affairs. At the time, a Special Joint Committee of the Senate and House of Commons reporting on Canada’s international relations, noted a widespread concern over what was perceived to be the government’s lack of interest in the arctic and major flaws in security arrangements. These concerns were shared by Honderich who considered the age of the arctic was finally upon us, and a new approach and plan of action was required. Arctic Imperative is both a call and a plan for action.
Honderich does not answer directly the question raised by the sub-title. Nevertheless, there is no doubt in his mind that it could happen, unless Canada rethinks her policies. A very strong case is made for a much greater northern dimension to Canada’s foreign policy. The time has come for more involvement in circumpolar affairs and a commitment to home-made policies, according to the author.
Canadians, particularly those concerned with domestic and international affairs should read this book. Few will agree with all assessments and proposals in such a wide-ranging study. It should not, however, be discarded by arctic buffs as the effort of a young writer who has just discovered Canada’s northern reaches, as so often is the case. Arctic Imperative is easy to read and stimulating for those responsible for ’developing a coherent set of policies for the arctic, including foreign policy, the importance of which was stated in the response by the government to the report of the Special Joint Committee of the Senate and House of Commons on Canada’s International Relations. Planners wedded to long-standing defence arrangements will find it unsettling.
Honderich divides his work into a number of sections, sovereignty, security, NATO, arms control, and foreign policy. The stage is set with an introductory view of the arctic today and an analysis of the Canadian perception of the polar region. A perception, which in the opinion of the author, has been greatly influenced by a Mercator projection-type outlook and an inheritance of fundamentally a British view of the arctic. Specific recommendations are contained in each section and summarized in the concluding chapter of the Foreign Policy section.
A theme running through the section on. Sovereignty is concern over the serious gap between what Canada has legislated and what it can enforce. Early settlement of the Inuit land claims would greatly enhance Canadian sovereignty in the arctic archipelago and its image abroad, argues Honderich; also, it would be looked upon by many Canadians as a step in narrowing the credibility gap between legislation and enforcement. The author agrees with Professor Franklyn Griffiths of the University of Toronto that fixation with the European theatre has hampered development of a truly Canadian national security perspective. The strategic importance of the arctic has increased dramatically with advances in military technology. It has, according to the author, become the newest military frontier
– where the superpowers confront each other regularly as their air and naval forces probe and counter-probe. The Canadian arctic is an integral part of this frontier, and is reason enough for Canadians to take a fresh look at security priorities. Honderic supports a continental defence relationship with the United States but suggests Canada needs much better political control over management of the joint defence effort, particularly at a time when interests and priorities appear to be diverging. The author advocates improved Canadian surveillance of the airspace, and acquisition of a polar class 8 icebreaker and nuclear powered submarines for maritime surveillance. When one remembers that Canada has been negotiating its sovereignty protection role, the argument becomes invincible that more attention should be directed towards building forces suitable for patrolling Canadian airspace and waters. Defence planners can no longer look at the US defence agreement in terms of what one can get for the least funds, if Canada is to avoid being locked into a US system, warns Honderich.
In conclusion, Honderich cautions against the temptation to settle for ’quick fixes’ when political tempers run high over challenges to sovereignty and issues related to security, resources, and the environment. A new perspective and an integrated policy with a long-range view of the circumpolar region is imperative.
This is unfortunate, but such errors do not detract from the book’s message, although they may be annoying to readers. Those responsible for foreign and defence policy should not dismiss Arctic Imperative as the work of an enthusiastic but uninformed nationalistic journalist, as much of Honderich’s call and plan for action is in keeping with “The North and Canada’s International Relations”, a year-long study by a Working Group of the Ottawa Branch of the Canadian Institute of International Affairs, — the members of which could hardly be tagged with such a label.
View the original scanned pages →
Originally published in bout de papier, Vol. 6, No. 3 (1988), pp. 44–45. Read the rest of this issue →
