Northwest Passage

[jdobbin]

Do you want a wraparound country surrounding you?

Why not? There's some Canadians who would like Canada taken over the by the U.S. anyways. This might be the first step.

[Chuck U. Farlie]

There is even diamonds and gold. There is a hell of a lot more resources that are not developed.

And it sounds like it might be a country of pseudo-cowboys who don't know when to use 'is' or 'are'.

[jbg]

There is even diamonds and gold. There is a hell of a lot more resources that are not developed.

And it sounds like it might be a country of pseudo-cowboys who don't know when to use 'is' or 'are'.

Better than a PM speaking a mongrel cross of two languages, who decided not to speak either in an understandable manner. And I have "proof".

[jdobbin]

Better than a PM speaking a mongrel cross of two languages, who decided not to speak either in an understandable manner. And I have "proof".

Sounds like you're making fun of his disability and paralysis the way the Conservatives once did.

[jbg]

Better than a PM speaking a mongrel cross of two languages, who decided not to speak either in an understandable manner. And I have "proof".

Sounds like you're making fun of his disability and paralysis the way the Conservatives once did.

See response here.

[jdobbin]

See response here.

Hmm, and his wife said that it was extremely difficult for him to speak and that over the years, it had

gotten worse.

[Drea]

See response here.

What sources jbg? A friend of a guy who's second cousin once removed spoke to a friend of a friend of Mr. Cretien?

Come on now.

[jbg]

Apparently, the US and Canada are gearing up for another in a long series of territorial scraps, starting with the War of 1812, including the Fenian Raids, and some strife between Maine and New Brunswick in the late 1830's, early 1840's. Query, does this mean that the US and Canada haul out their IED's ("Improvised Explosive Devices") and suicide bombers?

Strife Looms Between America, Canada Over Route

By NICHOLAS WAPSHOTT

Staff Reporter of the Sun

October 11, 2007

America is on a collision course with its close ally and northern neighbor, Canada, over who has access to the Northwest Passage, which has become open to sea traffic. The passage became fully clear of ice for the first time this summer because of record melting.

The prospect of large numbers of merchant ships using its short route between Europe and the East has set off a diplomatic row. Canada claims the passage as its own; America, backed by the Europeans and others, says it is open sea and therefore a freely navigable international waterway.

The Northwest Passage has been the Holy Grail of merchant shipping for centuries and the subject of endless fearsome expeditions determined to find a short maritime route between Europe and the valuable spice and silk markets of India and the East.

****

Canada contends that because ships using the passage must pass through the Canadian Arctic Archipelago, which are internal Canadian waters, it is entitled to control, regulate, and tax the expected surge in traffic. America and the European Union, however, say the passage is an international strait and that all foreign ships have the right of "transit passage."

America asserted its right to pass through the Northwest Passage in 1969 by dispatching the oil tanker Manhattan and in 1985 by sending the icebreaker the Polar Sea to test the waterway, in both instances offending the Canadian prime ministers of the day by failing to ask their permission to sail. The Canadians, however, are taking steps this week to assert their own rights to the passage.

"Our view is that it's our territorial waters and that we govern it accordingly," the head of the Canadian coast guard, George DaPont, told the BBC. "Obviously the Americans and some European countries have different views. I assume at some point in time they'll get settled, but we're pretty confident that they're Canadian territorial waters and that we should be regulating and asserting our control over them as we would over any other part of our territorial water. "It's critical. It's part of our history. Like any country, it's important to assert your control over your country and your territorial waters," he said.

****

Prime Minister Harper also announced in July the commissioning of six new Canadian naval vessels with icebreaking hulls to increase the number of patrols of the passage and the Arctic Sea. And he has ordered the building of a new deepwater port and a military base in the Arctic north to defend Canada's national interests.

"Canada has taken its sovereignty too lightly for too long. This government has put a big emphasis on reinforcing, on strengthening our sovereignty in the Arctic," Mr. Harper said.

***

[Wilber]

Apparently, the US and Canada are gearing up for another in a long series of territorial scraps, starting with the War of 1812, including the Fenian Raids, and some strife between Maine and New Brunswick in the late 1830's, early 1840's. Query, does this mean that the US and Canada haul out their IED's ("Improvised Explosive Devices") and suicide bombers?

Hope not but it would be a bummer if we had to pull our people out of Afghanistan to deal with matters closer to home.

[maldon_road]

Apparently, the US and Canada are gearing up for another in a long series of territorial scraps, starting with the War of 1812, including the Fenian Raids, and some strife between Maine and New Brunswick in the late 1830's, early 1840's. Query, does this mean that the US and Canada haul out their IED's ("Improvised Explosive Devices") and suicide bombers?

Not just the US and Canada. The EU is drooling over the thought of a clear NW Passage. We are going to need a lot of gunboats.

[margrace]

Hey I though you people did not believe in rapid global warming, isn't a lot of this contingent on the fact that the north is wariming up and fast. The North West passage is becoming easier to navigate. Boy talk about dichotomys in belief.

[fellowtraveller]

I have heard rumours that as part of the throne speech, the Tories plan to issue every citizen with a seal club. It is the new Home Guard.

[Peter F]

The prospect of large numbers of merchant ships using its short route between Europe and the East has set off a diplomatic row.

Just doing some route measurements on google-earth.

Helgoland - Shanghai NWP ~9,500 miles

Helgoland - Shanghai NEP ~8,500 miles

Helgoland - Shanghai Polar ~8,200 miles

Helgoland - Shanghai Panama ~15,900 miles

New York - Shanghai NWP ~9,900 miles

New York - Shanghai NEP ~11,600miles

New York - Shanghai Panama ~12,400 miles

'Polar' means the arctic is Ice Free and ships can sail right over the pole no problem.

If the NWP is becoming freer of ice would not the NEP also become freer of ice? If so then European shipping will be using the NEP to get to the East.

I also explored the Nares strait route (Hans Island) and could discern no reason whatsoever for anyone to take that route over a polar route or NWP route.

[jbg]

Hey I though you people did not believe in rapid global warming, isn't a lot of this contingent on the fact that the north is wariming up and fast. The North West passage is becoming easier to navigate. Boy talk about dichotomys in belief.

I myself don't believe the NW Passage will become commercially viable. Anomolous weather conditions may indeed open it briefly but it will never be safe and predictable. What people don't remember is that, at least during the winter, a warm winter in Southern Canada (up to 800 or so Trudeau Units from border) and Northern US equals a brutally cold arctic winter, and vice versa.

The key is the "North Atlantic Oscillation" or NAO, and the related Arctic Oscillation. In simple terms a postive NAO equals a strong west-to-east circumpolar jet stream, which bottles up and concentrates cold air north of the arctic circle. The same winds sweep mild air from the Atlantic and Pacific across the continents of North America and Europe. A negative NAO creates "blocking", which blocking high pressure systems, often near Iceland and Greenland, force polar air to be pushed out of polar regions and into the northern US and southern Canada. This creates bitter cold in those areas, whereas the Arctic regions receive a "return flow" of milder air from the south. While you won't be sitting outside sunbathing in Tuktuyutok, the temperatures there during "blocking" may range from -25C to -10C, as opposed to hovering under -40C. This has a major impact on winter ice formation. As for the summer, strong winds can blow ice away from Arctic coasts, briefly opening the passage.

Ask such explorers as Henry Hudson and Davis what happens if they're lured too far in and can't get out on time. This is not the basis for a shipping industry.

Link to historical chart, and correllate to your own weather.

As far as my suggestions of tensions between our countries, why wouldn't Canadians suicide bomb in Europe as well? [/sarcasm]

[sunsettommy]

Hey I though you people did not believe in rapid global warming, isn't a lot of this contingent on the fact that the north is wariming up and fast. The North West passage is becoming easier to navigate. Boy talk about dichotomys in belief.

Um it was navigable 100 years ago.Sailboats did it.

The region is warming in regional areas.But still cold enough to form sea ice and maintain large areas of it during the brief summer.

The main cause of the melting is the "Norwegion current" has sped up and changes in the winds in the polar regions.Most of the observed changes are on the ASIAN side of the North Pole.

The Artic sea ice level is about to reach its minimum levels that should soon see a reverse to expansion in the next few years.

Meanwhile the SOUTHERN HEMISPHERE has not shown any warming trend since 1979.Therefore it is NOT Global.

Then we have reports of a FOURTY + years cooling trend in most of Antarctica.

[Peter F]

Canada claims the passage as its own; America, backed by the Europeans and others, says it is open sea and therefore a freely navigable international waterway.

So what is Canada supposed to be doing that brings us into conflict with the Americans?

Is Canada's position that the NWP is not freely navigable waterway...to foreigners?

If not - then whats the problem?

[jbg]

So what is Canada supposed to be doing that brings us into conflict with the Americans?

Is Canada's position that the NWP is not freely navigable waterway...to foreigners?

If not - then whats the problem?

I think it's a hypothetical issue that is an easy way for Harper to distance himself from Bush on an issue with no real-world consequences to Canada, since issue will never ripen. My point is that even if a two-week season opens (assuming the GW alarmists are correct), one will never know what two weeks of the summer will have enough open water for shipping, and what part of the Arctic will be open at any one time. One cannot run a shipping industry that way, or send dangerous cargo like oil through without at lesat 8 weeks of dependable, iceberg-free open water. which is most unlikely. If you're relying upon mild weather (and even that weather isn't always so mild) a short season doesn't do the job.

[Peter F]

I think it's a hypothetical issue that is an easy way for Harper to distance himself from Bush on an issue with no real-world consequences to Canada, since issue will never ripen.

I think you're spot-on there. None of it makes any rational sense. It appears to be more of a non-issue to get tough on the 'mericuns...and perhaps the perfidious Danes maybe...

[bush_cheney2004]

So what is Canada supposed to be doing that brings us into conflict with the Americans?

Is Canada's position that the NWP is not freely navigable waterway...to foreigners?

If not - then whats the problem?

The problem is that Canada makes the preposterous claim of everything between the 60th and 141st meridian of longtitude all the way to the frickin' North Pole.

Edited October 14, 2007 by bush_cheney2004

[Peter F]

The problem is that Canada makes the preposterous claim of everything between the 60th and 141st meridian of longtitude all the way to the frickin' North Pole.

Preposterous, yes, but we're Canadians and the mythology of Canada is everything between the meridians right up to the pole belongs to us. Wish I could explain it. I suspect it has more to do with Nationalism than any rational reason. It's a Canadian Holy Cow, like water. There is no basis in reality of claiming an Ocean like that...other than continental shelf claims and 200nm economic zones etc.

But then, nobody in Canada is really complaining about our soveriegnty of the Arctic Ocean. The real stinker is that the USofA does not recognize the NWP (wich probably means the Parry Channel) as Canadian internal waters. Why that is I guess is the USofA also has it's Holy Cows. Freedom of the Sea's being one of them.

Now what Canadian gunboats are going to do up there I know not. Shoot USCG cutters? I doubt it.

But if the passage does become viable then some sort of SAR/pollution response ability would be a very sensible thing. For insurance rates if nothing else.

The whole thing is a sham create-a-crisis. Will Canada deny transit to American or anyone else's vessels? No. Will the USofA claim something in the Archipelago? No. They only want right of transit wich, under the UN Law of the Sea (signed by Canada, signed but not ratified by the US), Canada has no right to deny.

So America is only doing what Canada has to allow.

The whole thing is silly beyond belief.

Edited October 14, 2007 by Peter F

[jbg]

But then, nobody in Canada is really complaining about our soveriegnty of the Arctic Ocean. The real stinker is that the USofA does not recognize the NWP (wich probably means the Parry Channel) as Canadian internal waters. Why that is I guess is the USofA also has it's Holy Cows. Freedom of the Sea's being one of them.

My understanding is that the six mile limit applies to navigation, and the 200 mile limit is the economic zone. I haven't studied the issue, but is the Parry Channel within the navigational limit?

[bush_cheney2004]

My understanding is that the six mile limit applies to navigation, and the 200 mile limit is the economic zone. I haven't studied the issue, but is the Parry Channel within the navigational limit?

The territorial limit is typically a maximum of 12 nautical miles from mean low water, except under unique geo situations. As Peter F alluded, the USA rabidly exerts transit rights for warships around the world, from the Strait of Magellan to Bosphorus according to international law. An exception to this would be submarines, which go wherever the CINCs and skippers have the balls to go.

[jbg]

The territorial limit is typically a maximum of 12 nautical miles from mean low water, except under unique geo situations. As Peter F alluded, the USA rabidly exerts transit rights for warships around the world, from the Strait of Magellan to Bosphorus according to international law. An exception to this would be submarines, which go wherever the CINCs and skippers have the balls to go.

Thanks for clarifying. I'd forgotten.

Does this not mean, unless the channel is less than 12 nautical miles wide, that the passage is international?

[bush_cheney2004]

Thanks for clarifying. I'd forgotten.

Does this not mean, unless the channel is less than 12 nautical miles wide, that the passage is international?

No, "international" has more to do with how much international shipping traffic occurs in such a "narrow" channel. Special challenges have been settled by specific treaty (e.g. Montreaux Convention - 1936). Accordingly, if international shipping via a NW Passage becomes more common, Canada can only regulate the inevitable (for nav aids, pollution, security, etc.) as the ships transit.

[jbg]

No, "international" has more to do with how much international shipping traffic occurs in such a "narrow" channel. Special challenges have been settled by specific treaty (e.g. Montreaux Convention - 1936). Accordingly, if international shipping via a NW Passage becomes more common, Canada can only regulate the inevitable (for nav aids, pollution, security, etc.) as the ships transit.

Does that mean free passage through Puget Sound?