Can the Canadian Air Force protect the Arctic Oil?

[vic777]

Arctic Is Next ‘Battleground’ for Energy Resources

The Middle East remains the world’s focus for energy supplies, but the next “battleground” in the search for oil and gas resources could well be the frozen wastes of the Arctic.

And Russia appears determined to seize a huge portion of the region’s vast untapped reserves.

The U.S. Geological Survey has estimated that the Arctic could hold 1,670 trillion cubic feet of natural gas — 30 percent of the world’s undiscovered gas.

The region also contains some 90 billion barrels of oil, an amount equal to 13 percent of the world’s undiscovered reserves.

Rising energy prices, meanwhile, are making the extraction of those reserves increasingly cost efficient, at a time when daily world oil consumption is expected to climb 20 percent by 2030.

“Given the Arctic’s vast supply of energy resources and the world’s growing energy demands, it’s neither surprising nor alarming that Arctic nations are beginning to stake their respective claims,” writes Alan Dowd, contributing editor at The American Legion Magazine.

“What is alarming is how one Arctic nation is going about this.”

That nation is Russia.

In 2001, Russia claimed almost half of the Arctic Circle, basing its claim on “a dubious interpretation of an underwater ridge linking to the Russian landmass,” Dowd reports. A Russian expedition planted the nation’s flag under the North Pole in 2007.

In 2009, Russia announced plans to build a string of military bases along its northern tier, and in 2011 announced plans to deploy two army brigades — 10,000 troops — to defend its Arctic claims.

Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin has boasted: “Russia intends without a doubt to expand its presence in the Arctic.”

The United States has also expressed its determination to secure its rights in the Arctic, issuing a statement at the end of the George W. Bush administration that the U.S. “has broad and fundamental national security interests in the Arctic and is prepared to operate either independently or in conjunction with other states to safeguard these interests.”

The Obama administration has issued a similar statement.

Canada, Norway, Sweden, Denmark, and Finland are also taking steps to assert their claims to a portion of the Arctic, with Norway and Sweden both conducting Arctic war games in recent years.

Some observers say the United States can help secure its Arctic claims, and limit Russia’s, by joining the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, which has already been ratified by other Arctic nations, according to Dowd, a senior fellow at Canada’s Fraser Institute.

Protecting American claims could prove to be a problem, he adds. The United States currently has only three polar icebreakers, and two of them have exceeded their projected 30-year lifespan.

Russian can deploy 20 icebreakers.

[mcrit]

It's the Royal Canadian Air Force. (Sorry, I had to. )

The ability of Canada to exert influence in the arctic (via the Canadian Forces or other means) is a question of political will. It costs money to buy ships and aircraft, it costs more money to maintain them. Raising and allocating funds falls very much in the political domain. If there is a politician that can sell the public on the need to beef up the CF, (and at the same time ditch the 'polite' Canadian persona), then yes, the RCAF and the RCN could make the Russians think twice about being too aggressive.

[captain_dc]

Dam those 10 000 Ruskies...

My Ranger Patrol and I are heading up with our trusty 303's and were taking it all back.

The Canadian Ranger Project is expanding, developing into an official reserve unit of the Canadian Forces. Boots on the ground is a term tosed around a lot, putting local hunters and residents in a uniform to plant a Canadian flag further and further North is a cost efective way to establish boots on the ground in the Arctic.

Presently there is a Large CF exc. called Arctic Ram, with Reg and Res. Forces from the South training on Arctic operations.

Anything in the North Costs Money. It realy is a political isue..if we want to protect our Northern Soveirnty it will cost us.

DC

[azimuthaviation]

No it Cant, not without huge investment to the tune of tens of billions of dollars. Or the government can invest in education, architecture, real estate tourism and technology and just buy russian oil, or even russia itself. The Russians five times in the last century and a half tried to extend their sphere of influence militarilry, each time ended disastrously and they lost large amounts of territory in the process. I think Alaska was picked up for the cost to the americans of a can of sardines per household.

The RCAF could in my opinion be better used for more domestic services. Last summer I watched flames from wildfires reach to a few feet from the house I grew up in while the neighbouring town was decimated by fire. Meanwhile Canadas entire fleet of heavy lift helicopters was building girls schools in Afghanistan. SAR aircraft are dated, failing, and often the calling for rescue, the new SR92's have yet to be in service, water bombers are in short supply and theres still E model hercs in the air.

[GGCC]

I guess it's time to roll out my thoughts that we needn't worry about Arctic Soveirnty at all.

Perhaps, in the not too distant future, the Arctic will just be part and parcel of the US administration of that vast territory north of the 49th parallel that we now know as Canada....

More to the question, no i don't think the RCAF can defend our North, although, in fine Canadian tradition they would give it their best effort.

The US Navy Seabees used this (unofficial) motto, perhaps it can be adapted to pertain to our Armed Forces.

"We the willing, led by the unknowing, have been doing so much for so long with nothing, we now are qualified to do anything with nothing....."

[JMACK]

Maybe we need to take more than a dollar a barrel from the oil companies that want the arctic oil. Then we could pump some money into the CF and other important Canadian causes.

J

[old_man]

The RCAF could in my opinion be better used for more domestic services. Last summer I watched flames from wildfires reach to a few feet from the house I grew up in while the neighbouring town was decimated by fire. Meanwhile Canadas entire fleet of heavy lift helicopters was building girls schools in Afghanistan.

The military is not allowed to compete with commercial enterprise. The civilian companies hired to fight the fire with their helicopters must do it. There are of course exceptions.

[B_Boomer_54]

When will people understand that "oil" theoretically does not belong to any one nation. It is a commodity that is traded and utilized by every nation on earth and is viewed as such. If a country has oil and refuses to process it or sell it, take a wild guess what happens to them ?

I also cannot help but laugh when people talk so harshly about those terrorizing Russian commie bastards. People should read up on their history. The Russians have been our partners in the Arctic for quite some time now and have actually defended us on more than one occasion. As a matter of fact, it was those crazy wackos who took our side against the United States (who has been a thorn in our ass from day one), when we claimed the Northwest Passage as "internal waters".

I'd be more than happy to do business with the Russians.

[Brown Bear]

I also cannot help but laugh when people talk so harshly about those terrorizing Russian commie bastards. People should read up on their history. The Russians have been our partners in the Arctic for quite some time now and have actually defended us on more than one occasion. As a matter of fact, it was those crazy wackos who took our side against the United States (who has been a thorn in our ass from day one), when we claimed the Northwest Passage as "internal waters".

I'd be more than happy to do business with the Russians.

Brg. Gen. Jack D Ripper would not be very happy with your assessment. Neither would Colonel Batt Guano. Maj. "King" Kong wasn't crazy about them pesky Ruskies either! You need to catch up on your "cold war" movies. The only good RED, is a dead RED!

[watermeth]

You need to catch up on your "cold war" movies. The only good RED, is a dead RED!

gentlemen you can't fight in here this is war room !!..........

[GGCC]

abridged

I'd be more than happy to do business with the Russians.

Me as well, I want an AN-2

[1000 HP]

"Use it or lose it"

With a population of about 70,000 combined, the NT and Nunavut would be easy to invade. Population density is about 19 square miles per person. Most of the people live in a few scattered towns which means there is likely less than 1 person per thousand square miles in most of the NT and Nunavut. That is probably being generous. Half of those are toothless elders unable to do much more than look after themselves.
The wide open spaces would be difficult to hide in because of lack of tree cover but numerous times I've flown over a herd of musk-oxen and only noticed them after one of the young ones moved. You can fly for 5 hours at 135 knots in many directions without ever seeing a sign of human habitation.
Further north in the islands there are even less people. National geographic had a good article on the gas reserves located there. Very tempting for invasionary thoughts.
I read an article about a tiny little round island up there whose ownership is being disputed by Denmark (maybe, it's been a long time). A military analyst figured that if Canada went to war over it we would probably lose...

The way I see it is we better get developing the gas reserves there so we can build some large industrial bases and a decent population base.

[azimuthaviation]

The way I see it is we better get developing the gas reserves there so we can build some large industrial bases and a decent population base.

Much better idea than how Canada asserted her sovereignty over the arctic in the '50s. They picked up a few hundred inuit and dropped them off in the middle of nowhere and let them starve to death.

[mcrit]

Much better idea than how Canada asserted her sovereignty over the arctic in the '50s. They picked up a few hundred inuit and dropped them off in the middle of nowhere and let them starve to death.

Source?

[B_Boomer_54]

Much better idea than how Canada asserted her sovereignty over the arctic in the '50s. They picked up a few hundred inuit and dropped them off in the middle of nowhere and let them starve to death.

Nice try.

[azimuthaviation]

Wow seriously? This is new information? To people who grew up in Canada and have spent time in the far north? I shouldnt be surprised anymore...

From Wikipedia:

The settlement (and Resolute) was created by the Canadian government in 1953, partly to assert sovereignty in the High Arctic during the Cold War. Eight Inuit families from Inukjuak, Quebec (on the Ungava Peninsula) were relocated after being promised homes and game to hunt, but the relocated people discovered no buildings and very little familiar wildlife. They were told that they would be returned home after a year if they wished, but this offer was later withdrawn as it would damage Canada's claims to sovereignty in the area and the Inuit were forced to stay. Eventually, the Inuit learned the local beluga whale migration routes and were able to survive in the area, hunting over a range of 18,000 square kilometres (6,950 sq mi) each year.

They eventually got an apology forty years later.

The government has released several publications, and analyses of the human experiment, and they are all available for sale online if anyone is interested. Yeah right.

[Redneck_pilot86]

You're not the only one aware of that. I'm as surprised as you are that there are people that dont know.

[akoch]

I'd say pilots probably should just continue flying. The history is not something taught in Ground Schools. And once the Cold War propaganda ideas surface from beneath, it quickly starts to look ugly and sad.

[rigpiggy]

Methinks the Russkies invading the north would end up much like the Germans in Stalingrad, or Napoleon in Russia. The Logistics chain would bankrupt them. at the very least they would have to build massive airstrips, and supply them to attack iqaluit, goose, yellowknife, whitehorse, and fairbanks. Fairly sure they would prefer to fight it out in the International Courts

[azimuthaviation]

Yeah Im sure in it happened in Libya or China more people would here would have heard about it. And Parliament wouldnt have waited 65 years to condemn it

[Diadem]

"Use it or lose it"

With a population of about 70,000 combined, the NT and Nunavut would be easy to invade. Population density is about 19 square miles per person. Most of the people live in a few scattered towns which means there is likely less than 1 person per thousand square miles in most of the NT and Nunavut. That is probably being generous. Half of those are toothless elders unable to do much more than look after themselves.
The wide open spaces would be difficult to hide in because of lack of tree cover but numerous times I've flown over a herd of musk-oxen and only noticed them after one of the young ones moved. You can fly for 5 hours at 135 knots in many directions without ever seeing a sign of human habitation.
Further north in the islands there are even less people. National geographic had a good article on the gas reserves located there. Very tempting for invasionary thoughts.

There's a massive difference between invasion and conquest. Just because the Russians could put troops on the ground doesn't mean they could hold the territory; they'd just be a few thousand guys standing around in a whiteout hundreds of kilometres from anything worth conquering. Hell, we could put soldiers in Siberia if we wanted to, and we'd have just as easy a time holding onto it as the Russians would Ellesmere. Even if they did invade, they would land, set up camp and...what? Spend two years exploring for oil and gas before they could possibly begin drilling? Even if they knew exactly where the hydrocarbons were, how would they get the rigs in and the oil out? Are they going to build a pipeline across the shifting sea ice over the North Pole?
Once they establish a permanent base they become sitting ducks for attacks by aircraft and cruise missiles. A Russian presence in the Canadian Arctic wouldn't be a direct threat to the rest of the country because we don't have any strategic assets up there anyway, and it's too far from the rest of the country to pose any risk of further encroachment. As soon as they tried to hold onto any territory or oil derricks they would become stationary targets with absolutely no cover available, and the CF could sit back and lob missiles and bombs at them all day. Better still, the low population density means there's hardly any chance of having collateral damage on civilians. Russia might as well invade the middle of the Pacific.

[thirdtimecharm]

All of these scenarios require extensive research and thought and with this is mind I recently rented both "Red Dawn" and "White Dawn" and both provide a very clear picture of what will happen in the event of invasion. All signs point to the freedom fighters vanquishing all comers, over time.

In both movies, however, the Canadians play no part in the defense of the homeland.

Getting a Twin Otter stuck in the high arctic for a couple of months is not the brilliant strategic move it is often portrayed to be by our military. Retroactively giving ships, both American and Chinese, permission to transit our waters is not a sign of strength. Sovereignty is not defined by how far north you have a car accident, or how well you can bomb a golf course in Yellowknife.

Any attempt to invade Nunavut or the NWT would be fought back by the Americans, with little regard to what folks in Toronto or Ottawa think. They are the ones who have the history of fighting and working in the Arctic and have maintained those skills the best. They paid for the vast majority of the infrastructure in the Canadian Arctic, they had the only year-round, fighting capable force Nunavut has ever seen. The Canadian military, unless this is a massive disinformation campaign, have proven to be fairly inept up there.

But this isn't the average soldier or the average airman's fault... armies protect what a country feels is important and Canadians view the Arctic as being a drain on the nation and when push comes to shove, treat it as expendable. The Arctic is the no good, alcoholic brother who is tolerated at family functions but otherwise ignored.

The views expressed by many in this forum highlight that.

So, the real play might be for Canada to sell of rights and responsibilities in the Arctic in order to help pay for the F-35 program so that the front line could be better defended. The real front line- that 150 km stretch of land north of the American border- the Real Canada.

And, in the Arctic, my cousin Jacob will shoot his arrow at the last invader standing.

Again.

[Apollo]

In addition to Russia, I would be worried about China - they're building an armed arctic fleet, with no arctic waters to speak of... Why would they do that?

[mcrit]

The 'battle' won't be for the NWT. The 'ground' that we will be fighting for is on the bottom of the arctic ocean, several hundred miles offshore; that's where the oil is. They only way to put a presence there is via air or sea power.

As for the CHICOMs; they are pragmatic and unashamed about looking after their self interests. They are not saddled with a PC dogma and don't care what the rest of the world thinks of them.

[co-joe]

You're not the only one aware of that. I'm as surprised as you are that there are people that dont know.

I was once told that when the Canadian government relocated the Inuk to Resolute they killed their dogs so they'd have to stay put. Not sure of validity...

Q: Why is it the air force's responsibility to "protect Arctic Oil"? Weird question really. Do you mean can the Canadian forces protect Canada? If Russia decides they want our arctic resources there's not much we could do to stop them...except be a part of NATO maybe. OK Problem solved.