SEN. MURKOWSKI WELCOME
ADDRESS FOR THE ARCTIC IMPERATIVE SUMMIT
***As Prepared For Delivery***
JUNE
19, 2011
Good evening and
welcome to the Arctic Imperative. First
I want to thank Alice Rogoff and her staff for putting together a fantastic
agenda and very impressive list of speakers and participants. You
have truly brought the Arctic conversation to Alaska on a world scale and I am
very pleased to be able to be here and participate. I speak frequently at conferences about our
nation’s role in the Arctic but somehow it doesn’t seem as pressing when it’s 100
degrees in Washington D.C. It’s much
more relevant here at home in the cool of Mt. Alyeska.
I have to tell you, the
topics that you are covering in this summit are truly on the leading edge of
Arctic issues. I would love to stay and
listen to the sessions, but, unfortunately, I need to return to my duties in
Washington D.C.
It is absolutely critical
that we are having this Arctic conversation right now. Interest in the Arctic continues to increase as
the impacts of climate change and globalization on an ice-diminished Arctic
become known. Tomorrow you start the
conversation with a panel that addresses the question as to why the Arctic
matters. Why should someone in the
Midwest care about the Arctic and whether the United States is an Arctic
nation? And what does it mean to be an
Arctic nation?
With some of the
leading Arctic experts from around the world here at this conference, I hope
you give focus to answer that question.
One thing I know for sure, that the United States government is waking
up to the fact that we are an Arctic nation and showing more leadership.
As most of you know, I
recently attended the 7th Ministerial meeting of the Arctic Council
in Nuuk, Greenland with Secretary of State Clinton and Secretary of the
Interior Salazar.
The trip
was historic because it was the first time a Secretary of State has led the
United States delegation to an Arctic Council meeting. It was also the first time a member of
Congress has attended. We met with the foreign ministers of the eight Arctic
Council nations and representatives of indigenous groups to discuss issues
related to Arctic governance, climate change, environmental protection, and
watched the ministers sign a historic search and rescue agreement.
As an Alaskan, it was
music to my ears to hear Secretary Clinton say that the United States is an
Arctic nation and as such we have responsibilities in the region. We are an Arctic nation because of Alaska and
its indigenous people. The
acknowledgment by the Secretary of State was also important for the other
Arctic nations to hear as many had wondered when the U.S. would step it up on
the Arctic.
There were other
positive outcomes from the Council meeting in Nuuk. The search and
rescue agreement, the first ever legally binding agreement among Arctic states
negotiated under the auspices of the Arctic Council, will strengthen the
cooperation on search and rescue between Arctic states. As Arctic sea ice decreases, maritime
activities are increasing in the Arctic. Aviation traffic is also on the rise
as new polar aviation routes cross the Arctic air space in several
directions. Limited rescue resources,
challenging weather conditions, and the remoteness of the area render SAR
operations difficult in the Arctic, making coordination among the Arctic
nations imperative.
The conference was also
important to learn what others in the region are doing. It is frustrating to see the United States
struggling so mightily with our economy and the present fiscal environment
while the other Arctic nations are moving forward with significant investments
in the region.
Russia has recognized
that their natural resource future lies in the Arctic and they are investing heavily. It was very significant when, after 40 years
of negotiating, Norway and Russia signed a historic new treaty on maritime
delimitation and cooperation in the Barents Sea and Arctic Ocean. There had
been a long history of cooperation on straddling fish stocks, but the new
treaty also addresses energy development across the new boundary and created a
joint operating agreement. This treaty
also provides an excellent example of the type of international cooperation
that is possible in the Arctic.
The Russians are
investing in the port of Murmansk as the base for the Russian Arctic with
marine infrastructure. Some of the
critical investments will clearly be public-private partnerships including
foreign capital. They are also contemplating upgrading their nuclear ice
breaker fleet while continuing to build ice strengthened commercial ships to
carry minerals, hydrocarbons and cargo through ice covered northern waters.
In the United States,
however, it is a different story. While
the Coast Guard, Navy and Army Corps of Engineers continue to study the
potential infrastructure needs in Alaska, we are not moving forward with any
significant new investments, or strategies to do so. With the scheduled decommissioning of the
POLAR SEA, the Coast Guard will only maintain one heavy ice breaker in its
fleet, which is not expected to return to service until 2013.
While the Coast Guard
does have a medium endurance ice breaker, HEALY, the cutter is not equipped to
handle the thick multi-year ice that is present in the Arctic. It is a tremendous frustration to me that
even though we all acknowledge the need for new heavy ice breakers, we have
made minimal progress on developing a plan to refurbish or replace the aging
polar class icebreakers.
It has been projected that
a seasonal ice free Arctic Ocean was decade’s away and maritime shipping
through the Northwest Passage, Northern Sea Route and direct transits across
the Arctic Ocean were going to be few and far between. But last year there were five Northern Sea Route
transits including a number of experimental trans-Arctic voyages. The Russian
Federation has received 15 ice breaker escort requests to provide navigational
support through the Northern Sea Route for this year. Last year, they only had four requests. While I recognize that most of these transits
are proof of concept, it certainly highlights the fact that our projections for
maritime transportation through the Arctic are being exceeded quite rapidly.
Energy development is
another area of potential in the Arctic, but where we in the U.S. have not been
leading. As we know, The
Arctic holds vast amounts of energy, but until recently,
the resources of the Arctic were deemed to be too difficult to access and
expensive to develop.
But with increasing
access and high energy and mineral prices, the Arctic, which is estimated to
contain approximately 22 percent of the world’s remaining oil and gas reserves,
is now being actively explored and developed.
Six of the eight member nations of the Arctic Council are exploring or producing
energy resources in their waters.
This makes energy
exploration among the most important and perhaps the most serious issues for
Arctic policy moving forward. This includes conventional oil and natural gas as
well as methane hydrates and other less conventional forms. Offshore Alaska we are estimating 15 billion
barrels of oil in a concentrated area of the Chukchi Sea and 8 billion barrels
in the Beaufort Sea, and while we have had serious delays in exploration, I am
hopeful that exploratory wells will prove up next summer.
Energy development and
protection of the Arctic environment must go hand in hand, and I was pleased
that the Arctic Council announced the formation of a new task force that will
negotiate measures for oil spill preparedness and response throughout the
region.
The decision to launch
these negotiations is evidence of the strong commitment to proactively address
emerging issues in the region and to create international protocols to prevent
and clean up offshore oil spills in areas of the region that are becoming increasingly
accessible to exploration. The U.S.,
and more specifically, Alaska, must be engaged.
While some have
described a scenario where the Arctic is undergoing a “race for resources”,
after seeing the international cooperation at the Arctic Council, I believe
what we have is a race for cooperation and sustainable management.
The Arctic offers perhaps
the best opportunity to work collaboratively and is one area in
which the Obama Administration can highlight international cooperation in the
implementation of U.S. foreign policy.
This follows the Administration’s intent to “reset” relations with
Russia and the Arctic is the perfect place to do so.
So, as we look north to
the future-what is in store for the Arctic?
I believe that the pace of change in the Arctic DEMANDS that greater
attention be focused on the region. The implications of the dynamic changing
Arctic for U.S. security, economic, environmental, and political interests
depend on it.
I give you all my
commitment that I will do my part- to move the Law of the Sea Treaty through
the Senate; to advocate for new ice
breakers and infrastructure in the Arctic;
to support Arctic research and to
encourage the United States to continue increasing its’ role in the region and
with the international Arctic community.
And I challenge all of
you, as Arctic leaders in this country and abroad, to develop some very
specific recommendations and outcomes from this summit. You can help move the Arctic conversation
forward and provide us all with valuable insight and initiatives.
We can make the case
for the strategic importance of the Arctic to the United States and we will
know we’ve been successful when the Iowa farmer proudly acknowledges that he
lives in an Arctic nation.
My thanks to those who
will help contribute to this important dialogue over the next few days. And Alice, thank you for this Arctic Imperative.
###