# Russia's Arctic Militarization (merged)



## daftandbarmy (17 Sep 2008)

Oh this should end well.


Russia threatens to seize swathe of Arctic 


 "We must finalise and adopt a federal law on the southern border of Russia's Arctic zone," Mr Medvedev told a meeting of the Security Council, in remarks carried by Interfax news agency.

"This is our responsibility, and simply our direct duty, to our descendents," he said. "We must surely, and for the long-term future, secure Russia's interests in the Arctic."
Global warming has stepped up the fight for the disputed Arctic, believed to be laden with vast reserves of oil and gas. Russia has pitted itself against Canada, Denmark, Norway and the United States to fight for a greater part of the region, arguing that most of it is Russian territory since an underwater ridge links Siberia to the North Pole's seabed.

Last August, a Russian mini-submarine carrying politicians and scientists plunged to the depths of the Arctic and claimed to plant a Russian flag to mark Moscow's stake in the territory.

Footage of the alleged planting was widely broadcast on Russian television – but later turned out to be images taken from the Hollywood blockbuster Titanic.
Under international law, each of the five countries that lay claim to the Arctic own a 320-kilometre zone that extends north from their shores. That arrangement is up for UN review in May next year.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/russia/2976009/Russia-threatens-to-seize-swathe-of-Arctic.html


----------



## Greymatters (17 Sep 2008)

Sounds like they are setting the groundwork for some hard-nosed negotiations come next May...


----------



## oligarch (18 Sep 2008)

Negotiations will proceed according to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, with participation by all artic states, including Canada, that have claimed a piece of the arctic that extends beyond the 200 mile economic zone originally allocation. So far Norway, Russia, Canada, and Denmark, launched projects to establish claims that certain Arctic sectors should belong to their territories. There is no "seizing a swthe" coming up in the near future, just political and geological discussions.


----------



## Greymatters (18 Sep 2008)

oligarch said:
			
		

> Negotiations will proceed according to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, with participation by all artic states, including Canada, that have claimed a piece of the arctic that extends beyond the 200 mile economic zone originally allocation. So far Norway, Russia, Canada, and Denmark, launched projects to establish claims that certain Arctic sectors should belong to their territories. There is no "seizing a swthe" coming up in the near future, just political and geological discussions.



Its never 'just' discussion - outlandous claims by Russia/USSR are often usually a prelude to more serious talks, where dropping of said outlandish claims is expected to net them a reward somewhere else.  Its a standard tactic ever since the days of Molotov...


----------



## gun runner (18 Sep 2008)

Ok, another reason why we should not elect the Liberals into the PM's office. Dion is positioning his party to kill the arctic sovereignty objectives that the Conservatives are pushing for...and this is looming on the horizon! Ubique


----------



## Snafu-Bar (18 Sep 2008)

Well by a swath, they do take up most of the area near the pole as we do, and they are entitled to the area that is on THIER side of the pole as just as we are seeking to maintain the region on our side of the pole.

 Cheers.


----------



## gun runner (18 Sep 2008)

And if they decide that we are not using our side ...so we'll take that one too!! Then what? My dad always told me not to trust the Russians, They have two faces and three hearts, and will stab you in the back just a soon as look at you! IMHO. Ubique


----------



## Snafu-Bar (18 Sep 2008)

Well in the end we have no capabilities on our OWN, to withstand the Russian's if they so choose to take what they want by force....However with the rest of the world watching, we atleast stand the chance to Peacefully resolve any territorial issues.

 I'm pretty sure not many want the end results of a full out world war 3 with nuclear fallout...

Cheers.


----------



## gun runner (18 Sep 2008)

Yes, you have a point but wars have been started on less. Ubique


----------



## Paul W... (18 Sep 2008)

Putin is trouble.

As long as Putin is in power we're going to have trouble with Russia over our Northen resources.

We going to need an even stonger force to protect our Northern territories than the one Harper is buying us.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6580938720868203336


----------



## Snafu-Bar (19 Sep 2008)

Factor in the US interest and we're in a fkd if we do and completely fkd if don't situation.

 On one side we have the Russians, and they have a pretty sizable chunk of the arctic coastline leading to the pole as it is, hopefully they are only seeking to claim the lands leading to the pole withing thier geographic rights.

 On the other we have the US with thier Alaska coastlines jammed tween us and as such are looking to get as far east,west and north as they can in thier own search for resources. 


 The way i see it is, we ixnay the Ruskies and give up something to the US for the allied assistance regarding thier military and nuclear assistance in exchange for a sizable yet not overly exuberant chunck of the north.

 There is no hope of staking the full claim on the areas bordering our coastline all the way to the pole without one of the two taking liberties on that claim.

 Cheers.


----------



## Paul W... (19 Sep 2008)

The US will respect our soveriegnty,our politicans will allow them to drill for the oil and gas that's in our territory anyways,that'll be the reason why the US will respect our territories and stand up to Russia for us.

If anything happens I hope we can at least participate,if not run any military operation,if anything ever does happen.


----------



## CBH99 (19 Sep 2008)

The sad thing is that while Russia, Denmark, the US & others get ready to sit down & negotiate hard for their chunks of the arctic pie -- we're still twiddling our thumbs & bickering with the beaurucrats about ship specs.  I really wish the politicians would realize that ships will be required to enforce any sovereignty claims we have - and they don't just magically appear once you sign a piece of paper.  Argh.


----------



## Snafu-Bar (19 Sep 2008)

CBH99 said:
			
		

> The sad thing is that while Russia, Denmark, the US & others get ready to sit down & negotiate hard for their chunks of the arctic pie -- we're still twiddling our thumbs & bickering with the beaurucrats about ship specs.  I really wish the politicians would realize that ships will be required to enforce any sovereignty claims we have - and they don't just magically appear once you sign a piece of paper.  Argh.



 Ships won't last long with the Russian Sub fleet poppin holes in the hulls at will. Not that they are not needed, but they are NOT going to be intimidating to the likes of the Russian's or American's when it comes down to nitty gritty time. it is long overdue and by the time they go into service too little too late. As always.

 Cheers.


----------



## Greymatters (19 Sep 2008)

Paul W... said:
			
		

> The US will respect our soveriegnty,our politicans will allow them to drill for the oil and gas that's in our territory anyways,that'll be the reason why the US will respect our territories and stand up to Russia for us.  If anything happens I hope we can at least participate,if not run any military operation,if anything ever does happen.



Hmmm... we're more like a buffer zone sometimes...


----------



## old medic (19 Sep 2008)

http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/World/2008/09/18/6807866-ap.html

U.S. says Russia's decision to mark Arctic boundary is an internal affair
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS



> WASHINGTON - The United States says Russia's decision to delineate its southern Arctic boundary appears to be an internal administrative move that will have no standing in international law.
> 
> A statement from the office of State Department spokesman Sean McCormack outlined the procedure for defining the extent of a country's continental shelf under the Law of the Sea Convention.
> 
> ...


----------



## Fishbone Jones (19 Sep 2008)

.....and if I (personally) had anything to do with the discussion, I MAY have some worries about it. No matter MY feelings though, I'm not losing sleep over it.

The governance of international courts, and their decisions, the wacky shit they decide on, is not going to be changed by me, you or this forum. Groups like Power Corporation decide.

If you want to see for yourself, Power Corporation owns most of the politicians in this country. Brian Mulroney, Jean Chretien et famille, Paul Martin, the whole Rae family, amongst others. Liberal, Conservative, NDP. 

Stephen Harper is conspicuous by his absence. He also seems to be the only one that has done anything about the impending problem there, given all the years it's been a concern.

Bitch and whine all you want. Come the election, you can make your choice of the party that will persue your interest there, based on Canada, or profits for Power Corporation.


----------



## gun runner (19 Sep 2008)

The sad thing is that while Russia, Denmark, the US & others get ready to sit down & negotiate hard for their chunks of the arctic pie -- we're still twiddling our thumbs & bickering with the beaurucrats about ship specs.  I really wish the politicians would realize that ships will be required to enforce any sovereignty claims we have - and they don't just magically appear once you sign a piece of paper.  Argh.


Can you imagine our ice breakers with deck guns and torpedoe tubes? It might just come to that.Ubique


----------



## Harley Sailor (19 Sep 2008)

gun runner said:
			
		

> Can you imagine our ice breakers with deck guns and torpedoe tubes? It might just come to that.Ubique



Or maybe we should just make AORs for the Navy that are not just gun ships, but Icebreakers as well.


----------



## Harley Sailor (19 Sep 2008)

Let us not forget what happened with the Alaskan panhandle.  We lost the fight over that because there was not enough concern.  Too many people didn't care because it was way up there and of no value to them.  Heck, even the mother land (Great Britian) voted against us. How can we expect to keep the Arctic if we don't keep up the discussion with our friends and families.  Help spread the word and maybe we can boost the interest.


----------



## Kirkhill (19 Sep 2008)

Greymatters - since the advent of the long range bomber our principal role has been that of a buffer and a killing ground.   Look at where the Pinetree line was located.

Harley - all they have to do is build a 25,000 tonne boat that will bust through 10 feet of multiyear ice and maintain a convoy speed of 25 knots.

I do think that one of the jobs of the AOPVs could be as tenders for maintaining an underwater network of sensors and weapons, both fixed and mobile, as well as remotely operated and semi-autonomous (subject to "weapons free" protocols).


----------



## Ex-Dragoon (19 Sep 2008)

> Can you imagine our ice breakers with deck guns and torpedoe tubes? It might just come to that.Ubique



I would think there still would be too much residual noise for torpedoes to be effective in Arctic waters. Even so you are probably still not going to see a CCG icebreaker armed, unless their mandate changes drastically.


----------



## Greymatters (19 Sep 2008)

Kirkhill said:
			
		

> Greymatters - since the advent of the long range bomber our principal role has been that of a buffer and a killing ground.   Look at where the Pinetree line was located.



You're singing to the choir - but its not an opinion that a lot of people like to hear....


----------



## geo (19 Sep 2008)

With the Russian stock market going down the tubes & chances are the Russian economy will follow, methinks Mr Putin & sidekick are looking at some patriotic turn of events to distract their constituents.


----------



## Edward Campbell (19 Sep 2008)

geo said:
			
		

> With the Russian stock market going down the tubes & chances are the Russian economy will follow, methinks Mr Putin & sidekick are looking at some patriotic turn of events to distract their constituents.



Agreed, and see my comments, here. The Russians should have enough cash (from selling oil to Europe) to recapitalize their banks and provide enough liquidity to allow honest business to weather this crisis, but ... It's Putin and his thugs, after all, anything can happen.


----------



## gun runner (19 Sep 2008)

Well if this recent activity in Georgia is an indicator of how well Russia listens to the international community, then our case for the arctic that belongs to us will be a fart in the wind to them. They will do their best to strongarm that property from us in spite of what our friends and neighbours think. Ubique


----------



## Jarnhamar (20 Sep 2008)

Greymatters said:
			
		

> Hmmm... we're more like a buffer zone sometimes...



Or, if the Liberals win....butterfly zones...


----------



## gun runner (20 Sep 2008)

God... I hope they don't win.Ubique


----------



## TacticalW (20 Sep 2008)

Flawed Design said:
			
		

> Or, if the Liberals win....butterfly zones...



Dear god no...


----------



## daftandbarmy (21 Sep 2008)

gun runner said:
			
		

> God... I hope they don't win.Ubique



What? You wouldn't want to see 'Senator' Dallaire take over as Defence Minister? Geez....


----------



## TCBF (21 Sep 2008)

- Forget about sinking tax dollars in Canadian ships for the arctic.  Any will be too little too late.  What we need to develop are more bases on the islands.  You can't sink an island.  Surv bases along the NW Passage and some sort of un-manned sub-surface monitoring north of Ellesmere Island.  Phase III would be a fire-and-forget shore launched under-ice torpedo.


----------



## Kirkhill (21 Sep 2008)

Cormorants with ice drills?


----------



## TCBF (21 Sep 2008)

Kirkhill said:
			
		

> Cormorants with ice drills?



- You're onto something there..

... Get over the sub, drill though the ice, then pump in that really neat stuff that raises the freezing point of salt water.  Presto - instant ice-cube around the intruder.

 8)


----------



## daftandbarmy (21 Sep 2008)

I say we just train our Polar Bears to attack nuclear subs. It looks like some have already passed this PO check:

http://www.strategypage.com/military_photos/bears_sub1.aspx


----------



## RangerRay (21 Sep 2008)

Well, Dion says we shouldn't even try...

<a href="http://www.nationalpost.com/news/canada/election-2008/story.html?id=810348">Link</a>



> Mr. Dion said protecting Arctic sovereignty is vital, but he said Liberals see no point in picking a military fight with other countries staking a claim in the north.
> 
> *"We cannot win against the Americans, we cannot win against the Russians and . . . we are too civilized to shoot the Danes,"* he said during a campaign stopover in Alexandria east of Ottawa. *The Tories responded saying the Liberals have thrown in the towel on defending the Arctic.*


----------



## Snakedoc (21 Sep 2008)

daftandbarmy said:
			
		

> I say we just train our Polar Bears to attack nuclear subs. It looks like some have already passed this PO check:
> 
> http://www.strategypage.com/military_photos/bears_sub1.aspx



Wow those pictures are hilarious haha.  Good for Stephen Harper making a campaign stop in the north yesterday.  None of the other leaders have given as much focus to the arctic as he has...let alone gone up there to reinforce its importance to Canada.


----------



## Greymatters (21 Sep 2008)

RangerRay said:
			
		

> Well, Dion says we shouldn't even try...



Exactly what we need in a future PM - pessimism and a defeatist attitude...   :


----------



## Kat Stevens (21 Sep 2008)

Watching this guy spin in circles chasing his tail is amusing...for a while.  Later though, you start to feel sorry for the poor neurotic critter fella.


----------



## gun runner (23 Sep 2008)

Any effort we attempt in the arctic will have to be a really good one right from the get-go.  No pussy footing around! Build a military/Coast guard facility, and staff it with the kind of professionals that we are known to be and put the pressure back on the @ssholes that think they can waltz in here and take what isn't theirs to take. Strong and free! not any more... Strong yes, free no!! Ubique


----------



## daftandbarmy (23 Sep 2008)

Or.... we base out of Edmonton - or someplace like that - and swamp the north with more cost effective sensors to augment/ support the Rangers, and have an efficent QRF that can go anywhere, anytime, fast.

Gee, you could even reinstitiute the Airborne Regiment (sharp intake of breath) and prove that you can deliver a war capable battle group to any spot in the north within a few hours/days.


----------



## Kirkhill (23 Sep 2008)

daftandbarmy said:
			
		

> Or.... we base out of Edmonton - or someplace like that - and swamp the north with more cost effective sensors to augment/ support the Rangers, and have an efficent QRF that can go anywhere, anytime, fast.
> 
> Gee, you could even reinstitiute the Airborne Regiment (sharp intake of breath) and prove that you can deliver a war capable battle group to any spot in the north within a few hours/days.



With an all-season road to Inuvik for the establishment of a Forward Operating Base capable of supporting Resolute, Alert and Iqaluit.   And then you are just about right back to 1968 (or at least the Pre-Trudeau vision).


----------



## drunknsubmrnr (23 Sep 2008)

The Russians are only allowed to claim up to 350 nm from their baselines. I really doubt that conflicts with any Canadian territorial claims.

Like most of the current governments position on the Arctic, this is much ado about nothing.


----------



## MarkOttawa (26 Sep 2008)

A letter of mine in the _Ottawa Citizen_ Sept. 26:
http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news/letters/story.html?id=22656e35-8c06-462a-bdc8-da2e94cfa2fe



> *Areas of dispute*
> 
> Re: Boots on tundra, Sept. 23.
> http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/views/story.html?id=b05f0a48-8514-4342-a418-c486885788b8
> ...



Sodden footware, I'd say, to assert sovereignty claims in the aquatic environment.

Mark
Ottawa


----------



## aesop081 (26 Sep 2008)

Stiring up nationalistic feelings over land areas and such has worked in some countries in the past ( Argentna for one), i dont know how it will go over here in Canada.


----------



## GAP (26 Sep 2008)

eh


----------



## BradCon (27 Mar 2009)

From
http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/afp/090327/canada/russia_diplomacy_energy_arctic_defence_canada

OTTAWA (AFP) - The Canadian government on Friday reaffirmed its Arctic claims, saying it will defend its northern territories and waters after Russia earlier announced plans to militarize the North

...more on link.


----------



## time expired (27 Mar 2009)

Russians forming elite unit to enforce its Arctic claims,heard
on France 24 news today,looks like their serious.Are we?.
                              Regards


----------



## wannabe SF member (1 Jul 2011)

Here reproduced in accordance with the fair dealing provisions of the Copyright Act.

http://news.xinhuanet.com/english2010/world/2011-07/01/c_13961385.htm



> MOSCOW, July 1 (Xinhua) -- Russia would deploy two brigades in the Arctic to defend its interests in the region, Defense Minister Anatoly Serdyukov said Friday.
> 
> "The General Staff is currently drafting plans to establish two such formations. Those plans should take into account deployment sites, armaments, number of servicemen and infrastructure," the defense minister told reporters.
> 
> ...



Do the Russians even possess the capabilities to deploy several brigade sized formations in the arctic? Does this mean anything for us?


----------



## old medic (1 Jul 2011)

> the Russian Armed Forces also intended to created similar formations in other Arctic countries, such as Finland, Norway and Sweden.



Very doubtful story from a chinese website.


----------



## wannabe SF member (1 Jul 2011)

Perhaps a more credible source:

From Reuters, reproduced in accordance with the fair dealing provisions of the Copyright Act.

http://uk.reuters.com/article/2011/07/01/russia-arctic-troops-idUKLDE76017D20110701



> * General Staff working on plan to boost presence in Arctic
> * Russia set to start producing Bulava nuclear missile
> 
> By Thomas Grove
> ...


----------



## aesop081 (1 Jul 2011)

Inky said:
			
		

> Perhaps a more credible source:



You second source makes no mention of this :



> Serdyukov noted that the Russian Armed Forces also intended to created similar formations in other Arctic countries, such as Finland, Norway and Sweden.



The above is from the first article you posted.


----------



## Blackadder1916 (1 Jul 2011)

Inky said:
			
		

> Here reproduced in accordance with the fair dealing provisions of the Copyright Act.
> 
> http://news.xinhuanet.com/english2010/world/2011-07/01/c_13961385.htm
> 
> ...



While it would not be any more of a direct military threat to Canada than currently exists - and even the current direct Russian threat is questionable - it does indicate that Russian politicians are having to play the same game as their western counterparts.  Though Vladimir Putin may enjoy the public spotlight, he probably yearns for the past days when a Soviet Russian leader did not have to worry about the voting public's opinion (not that he seems to worry much about it).  There is much similarity in the current Canadian government making noise about the need of an increased military presence in the North.

_(Edited to add)_

As for their capability to place two brigades in the arctic - note the two locations mentioned, Murmansk and Arkhangelsk.  If one compared similar Canadian locations in terms of size, facilities and transportation connections, it would be like placing a brigade in Halifax and Quebec City (except the port of Quebec City is not ice free year round).  Oh, there already is a brigade just outside Quebec City.


----------



## 57Chevy (2 Jul 2011)

Another article on the subject and shared with provisions of The Copyright Act

They have been bickering about a signed agreement by the former Soviet Union of setting up a naval installation in Syria since 1971.          http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/100607.0.html  and Syria expects Russia to finally decide on the idea.  Perhaps the Russians see a brighter future in the North. 

http://geoplotical.blogspot.com/
Russia has announced it will send two army brigades, including special forces soldiers, to the Arctic to protect its interests in the disputed, oil-rich zone.

Russia, the U.S., Canada, Denmark and Norway have all made claims over parts of the Arctic circle which is believed to hold up to a quarter of the Earth's undiscovered oil and gas.

Prime Minister Vladimir Putin said Russia 'remains open for dialogue' with its polar neighbours, but will 'strongly and persistently' defend its interests in the region.

Russia's defence minister Anatoly Serdyukov said the military will deploy two army brigades which he said could be based in the town of Murmansk close to the border with Norway.

He said his ministry is working out specifics, such as troops numbers, weapons and bases, but a brigade includes a few thousand soldiers.

In May Commander of the Russian Ground Forces Aleksander Postnikov took a three-day long trip to military camps on the Kola Peninsula, next to the borders of Finland and Norway.

A spokesperson for the Russian Defense Ministry said that the first soldiers to be sent would be special forces troops specially equipped and prepared for military warfare in Arctic conditions.

Claim: In 2007 The Russians used a mini submarine to plant their flag and stake a claim on much of the Arctic Ocean floor

The Russians say the establishment of an Arctic brigade is an attempt to 'balance the situation' and point to the fact that the U.S. and Canada are already establishing similar brigades.

Drilling for oil and gas in the Arctic Circle has been made feasible as much of the Sheet ice has melted due to climate change.

 Earlier this month Russia and Norway finally agreed terms on a deal to divide an area of the Barents Sea.

The two countries had been locked in a dispute over the 68,000 square mile area since 1970.

However the agreement does not address one of the Russians' key claims, that a huge undersea mountain range that covers the North Pole, forms part of Russia’s continental shelf and must therefore be considered Russian territory.

The race to secure subsurface rights to the Arctic seabed heated up in 2007 when Russia sent two small submarines to plant a tiny national flag under the North Pole.

Russia argued that the underwater ridge connected their country directly to the North Pole and as such formed part of their territory, a claim which was disputed by other Arctic nations.

The Russian company Rosneft has struck a short-term deal with BP to begin drilling in areas of the far north, even if the future of the marriage business is still not clear. 

Oil reservoirs at the Val Gamburtseva oil fields in Russia's Arctic Far North. Russian state oil company Rosneft earlier this year announced a joint venture with BP

Another change brought about by the melting ice in the Arctic Ocean is that it has opened up new sea routes. 

The amount of ice in the region continues to decrease each year and many experts predict it will disappear completely by the year 2030.

This week a leading British global security expert predicted that the competition between nations for natural resources will bring about a third world war.

Professor Michael Klare of Hampshire College, believes the next three decades will see powerful corporations at serious risk of going bust, nations fighting for their futures and significant bloodshed.

He said the winners in the race for energy security will get to decide how we live, work and play in future years - with the losers 'cast aside and dismembered'.

He explained: 'The struggle for energy resources is guaranteed to grow ever more intense for a simple reason: there is no way the existing energy system can satisfy the world’s future requirements.'


----------



## 57Chevy (6 Jul 2011)

Russia launches Arctic expedition, beefs up military presence
  Jeff Davis/Postmedia News/July 6, 2011
http://www.canada.com/news/Russia+launches+Arctic+expedition+beefs+military+presence/5060448/story.html#ixzz1RMbFjApl

Highlights mine

A Russian scientific expedition — led by a nuclear-powered icebreaker — has set sail on a mission to solidify Russia's claim to a resource-laden tract of the Arctic seafloor, in a summer that will see intensified military activity in the high Arctic.

Russia has also announced it will station two new Arctic warfare brigades north of 60 degrees — a move that will expand Russia's northern military capabilities far beyond those of Canada.

The research vessel Academik Fyodorov will conduct a sub-sea mapping exercise of the Lomonosov and Mendeleev ridges in Russia's second mission to determine the boundaries of Russia's Arctic continental shelf.

If Russia's claims to these two ridges named for iconic Russian scientists is successful, they will gain more than one million square kilometres of Arctic territory.

In 2012, Russia will submit these and other data to a United Nations panel that will decide which nations own which sections of the Arctic seabed. The five Arctic nations — Canada, Denmark, Norway, Russia and the United States — are locked in a tight race to gather evidence to support their claims amid reports that global warming could leave the region ice-free by 2030.

"I expect that next year we will present a well-based scientific claim about expanding the borders of our Arctic shelf," Deputy Prime Minister Sergei Ivanov said in the northern town of Naryan-Mar, as the expedition set sail Wednesday.

"The expedition is equipped with modern equipment and everything necessary for a proper and scientific claim," he said told Russia's ITAR-TASS news agency.

The Arctic seabed is believed to hold 13 per cent of the world's undiscovered oil reserves and 30 per cent of the gas resources yet to be found, according to the U.S. Geological Survey.

Russia will do more than conduct mere scientific missions in the Arctic this summer.

The Russian military is putting together two brigades of specially trained Arctic troops to protect Russian interests, Russian Defence Minister Anatoly Serdyukov announced on July 1. A brigade typically consists of 3,000 to 5,000 troops.

"The general staff is currently drafting plans to establish two such formations. Those plans should take into account deployment sites, armaments, number of servicemen and infrastructure," the defence minister said.

The minister said the northern Russian cities of Murmansk or Arkhangelsk are being considered as the bases for the new Arctic warfare units.

Also last week, Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin announced plans to build a $33-billion year-round port on the Yamal Peninsula, in the Russian Arctic.


While Canada does not have such ambitious plans for infrastructure or military bases in the Arctic, the Canadian Forces will be mounting a large show of force in the Arctic this summer.


Operation Nanook is to play out in several phases on and near Baffin Island and Ellesmere Island throughout August, with more than 1,000 Canadian Forces personnel participating. It will involve CF-18 fighter jets as well a surveillance and transport aircraft, a warship, infantry companies from Quebec and Alberta, and 5 Canadian Ranger Patrol Group — Inuit reservists who have broad experience surviving in the extreme environment of the Far North.

"It will be the largest operation that has taken place in recent history," Defence Minister Peter MacKay said Saturday in Kandahar, Afghanistan.

"All of this is very much about enlarging the footprint and the permanent and seasonal presence we have in the North. It is something that we as a government intend to keep investing in."

Piotr Dutkiewicz, a professor of Russian studies at Carleton University, said Russian and Canadian claims to the Arctic seafloor overlap, and tensions stand to increase.

"The Canadians are also claiming part of this territory, so I see on the horizon some conflicting claims on this part of the Arctic,"

He said Canada's military and scientific presence in the Arctic pales in comparison to Russia's.

"At the moment, obviously, we are no match for the Russians," he said. "The Russians are stronger, better and have more money."


But while Russia has better scientific capacity, superior icebreaking and military capacity, Dutkiewicz said, Canada has a few northern strengths as well. He pointed out Canada's stricter environmental and biodiversity protections, better health and social conditions in the north, and excellent satellite technology.

He said co-operation, rather than conflict, will best serve Canada's national interest.

"If we start competition, at the moment, we may lose," he said. "If we start co-operation, we may win."


(With files from Agence France-Presse and Matthew Fisher, Postmedia News)

                                            Article shared with provisions of The Copyright Act


----------



## WingsofFury (7 Jul 2011)

57Chevy said:
			
		

> While Canada does not have such ambitious plans for infrastructure or military bases in the Arctic,



I know the plans are behind schedule but to say that we have no ambitious plans for infrastructure or military bases in the Arctic is, in my personal opinion, inaccurate.

I also think that there will be more plans announced over the next few years which will increase the Canadian Forces capability in the arctic on all three fronts.

From an Air Force perspective, with the successful completion of Op Boxtop last year using the CC-177, the successful landing of a CP-140 Aurora at CFS Alert, and the overflight of a pair of CF-18's and a Polaris tanker of Alert, will, as one of the articles states, 



> The Air Force’s increasingly robust capability to operate in the North will continue to be tested and demonstrated in the coming months and years.



Reference articles hyperlinked below:

Nanisivik, Nunavut naval facility project delayed at least two years 

Northern lights shine on Canada’s Air Force

Aurora makes historic Alert landing


----------



## Danjanou (7 Jul 2011)

Reproduced with the usual caveats et cetera


----------



## Colin Parkinson (7 Jul 2011)

Hah that's funny, I can imagine the Afghan hands, scanning the beach at Coppermine for IED's just out of habit.

In 10 years the new guys will be rolling their eyes about the "Old Afghans types" just as the current genration rolled their eyes at the "cold war types", who rolled their eyes at the "Korean war vets".


----------



## The Bread Guy (31 May 2012)

I'm not a big fan of the ceasefire.ca web page, but the site is sharing a July 2011 Briefing Note (6 page PDF), obtained via ATIP request, attributed to the DM of DND outlining Russia's threat (or lack thereof) to the Arctic - an excerpt:





> .... While many observers have commented in the media on Russia's perceived provocative actions in the Arctic, there has yet to be any serious cause for alarm .... {REDACTED} .... Moreover, DFAIT has noted in the past that both countries also share common challenges related to policy making in the Arctic.  Indeed, these commonalities could yield political and commercial opportunities for cooperation between Moscow and Ottawa.  From a Defence perspective, in spite of disagreements over Russian (Long Range Aviation) flights, there is mutual interest with regard to cooperation in SAR and Arctic domain awareness.  Defence is continuing to explore the potential for further cooperation with Russia in these fields ....


----------



## Kirkhill (31 Aug 2014)

Via the Guardian
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/aug/29/putin-ukraine-forces-nazis-arctic



> He (Putin) answered questions from young supporters, some waving banners bearing his face, at a pro-Kremlin youth camp on the shores of a lake. He looked relaxed but his tone grew intense as he spoke of Russia's military might, reminding the crowd that Russia was a strong nuclear power. "Russia's partners … should understand it's best not to mess with us," he said.
> 
> *And he made a pointed reference to the Arctic, which, with its bounteous energy reserves and thawing waterways, is emerging as a potential new point of conflict between Russia and its western rivals. "Our interests are concentrated in the Arctic. And of course we should pay more attention to issues of development of the Arctic and the strengthening of our position," he said.*



How thin should we slice the salami?


----------



## Edward Campbell (31 Aug 2014)

Kirkhill said:
			
		

> Via the Guardian
> http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/aug/29/putin-ukraine-forces-nazis-arctic
> 
> How thin should we slice the salami?




Our first _slice_ should be to announce that we will acquire and deploy at least four under-ice capable (say 15 days under ice endurance*) submarines: air independent propulsion. I do not have anything like enough knowledge, but at least two countries, Germany and Sweden, have and use such vessels.

_____
* I'm g_*uessing*_ that 10 days at, say 10 knots = 2,000+ nautical miles which I'm also _*guessing*_ is sufficient for our purposes.)


----------



## McG (31 Aug 2014)

It certainly makes a NATO arctic expansion seem to our benefit.


----------



## George Wallace (31 Aug 2014)

MCG said:
			
		

> It certainly makes a NATO arctic expansion seem to our benefit.



Rejuvenate Goose Bay perhaps?


----------



## ModlrMike (31 Aug 2014)

CFB Churchill MB?


----------



## Kirkhill (31 Aug 2014)

CFB Tuktoyaktuk?
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/the-north/building-a-road-to-arctic-prosperity/article16396177/?page=all



> Building a road to open up the riches of Canada's North
> 
> JEFFREY JONES
> TUKTOYAKTUK, NWT — The Globe and Mail
> ...


----------



## Kirkhill (6 Feb 2015)

Bump

Vlad has not changed his tune in seven years



> Vladimir Putin Wants an Arctic Air Army for 2015
> 
> Written by
> BEN MAKUCH
> ...



http://motherboard.vice.com/en_ca/read/vladimir-putin-wants-an-arctic-air-army-for-2015?utm_source=Outbrain&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=MotherboardCanada

Not "mukluks" but certainly an enhanced "no fly zone".


----------



## Loachman (6 Feb 2015)

Kirkhill said:
			
		

> http://motherboard.vice.com/en_ca/read/vladimir-putin-wants-an-arctic-air-army-for-2015?utm_source=Outbrain&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=MotherboardCanada
> 
> billions of square feet of natural gas



Two-dimensional gas?


----------



## cupper (6 Feb 2015)

Loachman said:
			
		

> Two-dimensional gas?



Nah. Big field, just thin.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (7 Feb 2015)

Our new Ranger rifle will surely put the fear of god into Ivan.


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (7 Feb 2015)

I think they have their hands full with the Ukraine, worthless rubble, and surplus of oil.


----------



## medicineman (7 Feb 2015)

Colin P said:
			
		

> Our new Ranger rifle will surely put the fear of god into Ivan.



Should they get them any time soon...which I doubt.  Ironically, they could probably trudge over the Pole or the Barents Sea and get some AK's pretty quick and cheap and be back shooting before someone in Ottawa makes up their mind what they'll get and what company in Quebec will be making them.

MM


----------



## daftandbarmy (7 Feb 2015)

No surprise that it looks like they are flying a Scottish flag from the bridge of that Boomer:

Russia Sends Nuclear Submarine Troops on Arctic Exercise

http://www.newsweek.com/russia-sends-nuclear-submarines-arctic-exercise-304931


----------



## hotei (7 Feb 2015)

That is actually the Russian Naval Ensign. The Scottish flag is the inverse.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_Navy_Ensign


----------



## daftandbarmy (7 Feb 2015)

hotei said:
			
		

> That is actually the Russian Naval Ensign. The Scottish flag is the inverse.
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_Navy_Ensign



Coincidence? I think not....  ;D


----------



## Kirkhill (7 Feb 2015)

> *Andrew is the patron saint of *several countries and cities including: Barbados, Romania, *Russia, Scotland,* Ukraine, Amalfi in Italy, Esgueira in Portugal, Luqa in Malta, Parañaque in the Philippines and Patras in Greece. He was also the patron saint of Prussia and of the Order of the Golden Fleece. He is considered the founder and the first bishop of the Church of Byzantium and is consequently the patron saint of the Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople.
> 
> The flag of Scotland (and consequently the Union Flag and that of its commonwealth countries) feature St Andrew's saltire cross. The saltire is also the flag of Tenerife, the former flag of Galicia and the naval jack of Russia. The Confederate flag also features a saltire commonly referred to as a St Andrew's cross, although its designer, William Porcher Miles, said he changed it from an upright cross to a saltire so that it would not be a religious symbol but merely a heraldic device. The Florida and Alabama flags also show that device.
> 
> The feast of Andrew is observed on 30 November in both the Eastern and Western churches, and is the national day of Scotland. In the traditional liturgical books of the Catholic Church, the feast of St. Andrew is the first feast day in the Proper of Saints.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_the_Apostle

Add in the predilection for both Burns and the Bottle (not to mention the Clydeside affection for Red Banners or the Declaration of Arbroaths reference to Scythian origins for at least some of the Scots) ....... MacComrade

Up St Andrew! Away with this upstart Romish cult of St Peter  >


----------



## The Bread Guy (20 Nov 2015)

Here's why Russia says it's pushing troops onto the tundra ....


> Russian Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin has said that the Russian military bases in the Arctic are not aimed at militarizing the region, they are necessary for the protection of economic projects.
> 
> "The establishment of our military bases and airfields in the macro-region [the Arctic region] is not aimed at militarizing this region, we do not have such goals. Our aim is to create conditions for economic development and protect both the existing and future infrastructure projects," he told a joint meeting of the Arctic and Antarctic Expert Council under Russia’s Federation Council and the State Commission on Arctic Development.
> 
> ...


----------



## CougarKing (28 Jan 2016)

Another Russian polar base:

Air Recognition



> *Russia will start building new Tiksi airbase in Arctic in 2017*
> 
> Russia will start building the Tiksi airfield in the Arctic in 2017, Russian Aerospace Force Commander-in-Chief Colonel-General Viktor Bondarev said on Monday. In all, 44 airfields will be reconstructed before 2020, he added. "The Temp airfield in the Arctic can receive even Ilyushin Il-76 aircraft [NATO reporting name: Candid] now. We are currently working on the Nagurskoye aerodrome that will also receive Il-76 aircraft," the commander said.
> 
> (...SNIPPED)


----------



## CougarKing (14 Feb 2016)

More on Putin's polar pivot:

NATO Association official page



> *Of Fire and Ice: Russia’s Militarization of the Arctic*
> Aleksi Korpela, Eastern Europe and Russia, NATO's Arc of Crisis, Russia, The Arctic February 4, 2016 Aleksi Korpela
> 
> Russian modernization and militarization of its Arctic region has been received with suspicion. While not all Russian designs in the Arctic are contentious, the erection of military bases and deployment of forces rings ominous to contiguous states and those with Arctic possessions or interests. This issue has become especially controversial in the last few years, as Russia has expanded its military infrastructure following the creation of a new strategic district: the Arctic Joint Strategic Command (OSK).
> ...


----------



## daftandbarmy (15 Feb 2016)

S.M.A. said:
			
		

> More on Putin's polar pivot:
> 
> NATO Association official page



We should offer to keep them supplied with poutine. The troops will seek asylum in mere days...


----------



## Cloud Cover (15 Feb 2016)

What terrorism activities are ongoing in Murmansk? 

I say good for them. Russia, (like Canada,Norway, Finland, Sweden, The United States, and Denmark)has the right to build bases and station forces, equipment and other military assets within their own domestic Arctic territory.  It would appear that Canada is the only country that has no real permanent or rapid reaction Arctic defence capability, ridiculous AOPs ships notwithstanding. (CFS Alert is a much degraded asset and the Rangers, while valuable, are not tasked with the mission set required to "repel boarders", (or borders), take your pick  

It's a good thing the Ukraine territory does not touch the Arctic. Putin would have taken that too.


----------



## daftandbarmy (15 Feb 2016)

whiskey601 said:
			
		

> What terrorism activities are ongoing in Murmansk?
> 
> I say good for them. Russia, (like Canada,Norway, Finland, Sweden, The United States, and Denmark)has the right to build bases and station forces, equipment and other military assets within their own domestic Arctic territory.  It would appear that Canada is the only country that has no real permanent or rapid reaction Arctic defence capability, ridiculous AOPs ships notwithstanding. (CFS Alert is a much degraded asset and the Rangers, while valuable, are not tasked with the mission set required to "repel boarders", (or borders), take your pick
> 
> It's a good thing the Ukraine territory does not touch the Arctic. Putin would have taken that too.



We don't really need to 'invade' our own arctic regions to claim these territories. For some reason, those crazy Inuit folks apparently like being Canadian


----------



## Cloud Cover (15 Feb 2016)

True. Can they speak Russian though?


----------



## MarkOttawa (4 May 2020)

Post giving 2020 update on Russia in Arctic:



> The Bear’s Arctic Build-Up (not aimed at North American portion), Part 2
> https://mark3ds.wordpress.com/2020/05/04/the-bears-arctic-build-up-not-aimed-at-north-american-portion-part-2/



Mark
Ottawa


----------



## Stoker (4 May 2020)

MarkOttawa said:
			
		

> Post giving 2020 update on Russia in Arctic:
> 
> Mark
> Ottawa



Nice digs, can support 150 troops. In reality about 50 troops are actually stationed there.


----------



## MarkOttawa (4 May 2020)

Chief Engineer said:
			
		

> Nice digs, can support 150 troops. In reality about 50 troops are actually stationed there.



Almost looks like a space base out of Star Trek or something  !

Mark
Ottawa


----------



## Stoker (4 May 2020)

MarkOttawa said:
			
		

> Almost looks like a space base out of Star Trek or something  !
> 
> Mark
> Ottawa



If I was a betting man, its probably optimized for efficiency and heat. Perhaps we should order a few prefab from the Russians.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (12 May 2020)

In anticipation of increased sea traffic in the Arctic Ocean and its peripheral seas, Russia has bolstered its Arctic military presence in recent years. It has reopened abandoned Soviet-era military installations, invested in the construction of new military bases and icebreakers, increased troop presence and Arctic military drills, and established advanced radar stations. Such actions have triggered discussions about Russian intentions in the Arctic, often described as revisionist and aggressive. How concerned should the West be?Any military build-up is generally not an end goal in itself but a manifestation of national interests and priorities. With this in mind, Russia’s military build-up in the Arctic can be analysed against three priorities pursued by Moscow. First, to ensure perimeter defence of the Kola Peninsula and the survivability of second-strike nuclear assets. Second, to protect Russia’s commercial interests in its Arctic zone. And third, to address socio-economic and demographic challenges facing its polar regions. In examining these in turn, it is clear there is much more to Russia’s military build-up in the Arctic than mere muscle-flexing.


https://www.europeanleadershipnetwork.org/commentary/what-are-the-main-drivers-behind-russias-military-build-up-in-the-arctic/


----------



## Weinie (12 May 2020)

Hmmm. So Russia's action, according to this think-tank analysis, are defensive and benign?


----------



## Colin Parkinson (26 May 2020)

Russia has the right and obligation to secure their Arctic region and manage vessel and air movements there. It's where their jurisdiction butts up against others is where potentiel aggression and friction appear.


----------



## daftandbarmy (28 May 2020)

Colin P said:
			
		

> Russia has the right and obligation to secure their Arctic region and manage vessel and air movements there. It's where their jurisdiction butts up against others is where potential aggression and friction appear.



They're also paranoid, mainly about Chinese expansion it seems:

China, Russia, and Arctic Geopolitics 

China’s burgeoning role in the Arctic could translate into direct competition with Russia.

Russia’s involvement in the region is to be expected, as one of the eight countries with territory above the Arctic Circle — and vast territory at that, with thousands of miles of coastline. Moscow’s involvement has been significant and long-lasting, with Russia advocating for the development of the Northern Sea Route along its Siberian coast as an alternative to southern routes through the Suez Canal and investing in the construction of the only icebreakers capable of operating in the Arctic Ocean.

China is a less obvious player in the Arctic, with its closest territory some 5,000 miles by sea from the Bering Strait. Even so, China has in recent years pressed for a greater role in Arctic affairs, becoming one of the 13 observer states of the Arctic Council in 2013. In 2018, China released an official white paper entitled “China’s Arctic Policy” — a step that in and of itself signals the country’s intent to play a larger role in the region — in which it outlines its priorities in the Arctic and describes itself as a “near-Arctic state.”

The cooperation between China and Russia in recent years adds an intriguing complexity to Arctic geopolitics. Experts are divided on whether the warming of Sino-Russian relations is a true strategic alliance or merely a marriage of convenience. Proponents of the former point to the numerous agreements signed between the two countries — punctuated by the personal friendship of the two nations’ leaders — and the two sides’ common voting record on the United Nations Security Council. Skeptics reason that Russia and China often have diverging goals despite mutual interests and remain distrustful of each others’ intentions. In this paper, we focus on the long-term outlook for the Sino-Russian relationship regarding the Arctic.

https://thediplomat.com/2020/03/china-russia-and-arctic-geopolitics/


----------



## Underway (28 May 2020)

daftandbarmy said:
			
		

> The cooperation between China and Russia in recent years adds an intriguing complexity to Arctic geopolitics. Experts are divided on whether the warming of Sino-Russian relations is a true strategic alliance or merely a marriage of convenience. Proponents of the former point to the numerous agreements signed between the two countries — punctuated by the personal friendship of the two nations’ leaders — and the two sides’ common voting record on the United Nations Security Council. Skeptics reason that Russia and China often have diverging goals despite mutual interests and remain distrustful of each others’ intentions. In this paper, we focus on the long-term outlook for the Sino-Russian relationship regarding the Arctic.
> 
> https://thediplomat.com/2020/03/china-russia-and-arctic-geopolitics/



There is no long term strategic alliance.  They have to many competing priorities.  A world dominated by China would be a bigger problem then a world dominated by the US.  After all the US is far away and generally isolationist.  China is next door and cranky.


----------

