From cold cuts to cold guts

Putin’s puppet in Moscow just handed Stephen Harper a gift which will allow him to change the channel from Ritz,

President Medvedev threatens Russian Arctic annexation

Russia triggered a fresh scramble for the oil wealth of the Arctic yesterday when President Medvedev called on his security chiefs to establish a formal border in the region.

Mr Medvedev laid claim to a vast tranche of the Arctic, telling his National Security Council that it had “strategic importance” for Russia. The US Geological Survey estimates that the region contains 90 billion barrels of oil, as well as gas reserves – all of it increasingly accessible as global warming shrinks the ice cap.

“We must wrap up all the formalities for drawing the external border in the continental shelf. This is our direct responsibility to future generations,” Mr Medvedev told the Kremlin meeting.

Since the last throne speech, Stephen Harper has been pushing arctic sovereignty as an issue and polling shows that the issue is important to Canadians. Over the past four decades, the Liberals have claimed many facets of Canadian nationalism, but the arctic and defense of our northern border has been a hallmark of Prime Minister Harper’s administration.

Flashback to the last election when Paul Martin was seen to have orchestrated a diplomatic incident with the United States over softwood lumber. In contrast, this would be an international event which Harper could react to rather than contrive. Leadership is a key theme for this election and Harper’s defense of Canada’s arctic sovereignty would underline this advantage that Harper has over the other leaders.

To paraphrase a famous person,

“It’s like a really bad Disney movie, you know. The professor, you know. ‘I’m just a professor of sociology from Montreal” and he’s the Prime Minister. And it’s like he’s facing down Vladamir Putin and using the quaint little Green Shift stuff he learned from Al Gore. It’s absurd. It’s totally absurd.”

Comments

comments

  • Toby

    I’m just a professor of sociology from Montreal” and he’s the Prime Minister. And it’s like he’s facing down Vladamir Putin and using the quaint little Green Shift stuff he learned from Al Gore. It’s absurd.

    Uh, as opposed to Harper who has a Masters of Economics and the grand experience of working as a political staffer and running a special interest group? That strikes fear into Putin's heart?

  • http://www.stephentaylor.ca stephentaylor

    He's also been Prime Minister of a G8 nation for 2.5 years, been the leader of a country that is doing the lion's share in Afghanistan turning that country around, eliminated Canada's nuanced soft power position when it comes to international affairs and let's not forget, he's “scary”

  • Bocanut

    Toby:
    Steven Harper stood up to the Chinese on their Human Rights record while Dion,if elected, will be sending billions of our tax dollars to China in 2012 for Kyoto carbon credits/Power Corp slush fund.
    Who would you rather have stand up for Canada?

  • Manuel

    Why isn't this being reported more….it seems like a big deal to me…..

  • http://www.nikonthenumbers.com/topics/show/75/9081#comment_9876 Taylor Cutforth

    And paid down $40 or so billion towards our countries debt reduction over the course of that time as PM.

    And paid out Billions to various city infrastructure and transit projects to different cities and provinces across Canada. I don't have the numbers before me at the moment, but i do know what work they HAVE done.

  • Craig Hubley

    The only way to defend the Arctic is to leave it under ice. Once it's open water, the international law of the sea clearly applies and the Russians will be able to make a continental-shelf-based claim like anyone else. The Arctic already is passable to submarines with no Canadian ability to intervene, once it's passable to surface ships it will be a renewed US vs. Russia game in which Canada doesn't really participate. Harper's position is a joke because:

    1. He signed an extension of NORAD into maritime monitoring which instead of requiring renewal every five years instead requires a positive act of Parliament to rescind, an action for which there would be serious consequences in the US. This means that NORAD, not Canada exclusively, monitors the ocean approaches to the continent, and accordingly most of the time an American, not a Canadian, will be deciding if a US sub going into what Canada claims are its waters constitutes an invasion, and the rest of the time it will be a Canadian whose presence at the NORAD command post will constitute de jure permission to the US to enter those waters.

    2. Being in formal defiance of the Kyoto protocol which prior governments and the House even under his own government upheld, he has absolutely no claim in any international law to object that Canada is suffering some negative sovereignty effects from global warming. Any international court will tell him that if he didn't do his bit to keep the ice in place, and he didn't, he doesn't have any right to complain about subsequent loss of sovereignty.

    A similar argument would apply based on the genocide of the Inuit – the people of that region would gain extra rights to self-determination due to the systematic attempt by Harper's government to continue to melt Arctic ice by, for instance, subsidizing Tar Sands and putting a price of zero on carbon emissions during the Kyoto period.

    International courts are notoriouisly unsympathetic to deal-breakers who are committing cultural genocides. As a formal signatory of Kyoto who is in compliance, Russia is actually in a better position to argue it's protecting the Inuit, and could use that argument especially if it got support from the Inuit population living within “Canada”.

    Territorial integrity is conditional on respect for international law and human rights: Go ask the people in Kosovo.

    3. Harper's avowed intent is to “open up” the Arctic to more oil and gas drilling. Meanwhile, according to the UK Chief Scientist, only about 1/3 of the existing fossil fuel reserves known can be burned before reaching a climate turning point. This means that any additional exploration, particularly for inaccessible oil or heavy oil rather than gas, actually constitutes another positive risk to the climate and further weakens the case for Arctic sovereignty. An international court would favour Russia if it vowed to keep the area environmentally sacrosanct and prevent any further “exploration”. Russia already has the world's largest coal reserves and is leaving them in the ground. So it's a more trustworthy steward, from an international court's point of view, than Harper's Canada.

    4. Even with the massive half-trillion-dollar non-budget Peter MacKay and Stephen Harper announced in Mr. MacKay's riding this year, Canada does not have the manpower nor technological capacity to patrol the Arctic. The Forces are overstressed as is. The most effective strategy is the cheapest one: Inuit on snowmobiles with rifles on the ice. Perhaps someday they can be relieved and resupplied with some cheap means of air transport like airships, which can set down more or less anywhere like helicopters and have astonishingly long ranges and ability to fly above weather. These don't sound like the kind of technologies Harper wants to “invest” in though. Seems he wants to buy lots of attack aircraft and supply aircraft that couldn't land on ice, nor on water.

    Russia on the other hand has a massive military base left over from the Cold War doing essentially nothing and including nuclear submarines and icebreakers. If the question is who can prevent illegal use of the Arctic, it's the US or Russia, with Canada as usual getting the bronze. And possibly disqualified for its treatment of Inuit, it's intent to foul the Arctic waters with oil drilling and further damage the climate with a glut of new fossil supply.

  • http://www.stephentaylor.ca stephentaylor

    Approve
    Sent from my BlackBerry device on the Rogers Wireless Network

  • Kursk

    So Craig..after reading your dissertation in which you confuse and conflate several issues, a shorter you should read 'give it up, we don't stand a chance' ?

    What makes you think Harper will act like a leftist? Should he moan about unenforceable treaties, whilst not making an attempt to beef up the military in the North?

    You laud Russia in one breath for being a signatory to Kyoto, then say we shouldn't confront them in another, when the very reason they want the land(an all beneath it..) is so they can reap the GHG producing fossil fuels extant in the region.

    Genuflecting may have been the Liberals way, but Harper is cut from a different cloth.If it is in our best interest to secure our northern frontier, he will do it.

  • Liz J

    You won't get this information as a lead item in the news and when it does the news media won't connect it to Harper at all. It's up to You Stephen to give it to them, spread the word, we can only try.
    The Liberals can't beat Harper on issues and policy, all they have is playing the game of Gotcha politics.

    Looking at the grave expressions of phony concern on the faces of the likes of Carolyn Bennett et al, calling for Ritz to resign and ramping up rhetoric about Harper being busy cosying up to George Bush, you know the cheap political game they're playing.

  • Cool Blue

    Great, and last week Dion, our “PM in waiting” was making jokes about how if the Russian military moved into the arctic we would be helpless to stop them….

  • MrEd

    re-ritz…scott Brison calling for him to quite …this from Mr Beer and Popcorn….where's the media on that…oh ya, they forgot to mention that

    In regards to the 50 page disertation mr Craig felt he had to write… get off the global warming kick and stop sniffing the airisol cans to speed it up… That big orange/red ball in the sky decides how hot or cold the planet gets… get used to it.

    As for reliance on fossil fuel you're own valient leader stated himself that 85% of the world is dependant on fossil fuel to make the world go around…and he's proposing we cut back to 50% of the reliance we have today over the next 20 years or so…

    okay craig…today you make and spend 50k annually… in the next 20 years I want you to forget about inflation and take a 15 thousand dollar pay cut but still do what you do today … regardless of how the cost of living or the rest of the world changes… now give your head a shake, stop drinking the dandilion wine, and get with the program…

    and as for Liberal cuts to the national debt…why isn't the media mentioning that the former Liberal Gov't pillaged the EI system to cut the national debit when they mention that if Canada were to go into a sustained recession the EI system as it stands today would likely colapse…

  • http://vollman.blogspot.com Robert V

    As a Hollywood celebrity, Matt Damon has far more authority to speak about politics than you, Stephen. As a millionaire paid to pretend to be other people on camera, he is obviously in a far better position to speak for the common person than you and me.

  • sdf

    Russia's pronouncment is a crisis. Our country needs to get serious about artic sovereignty (HArper talked about it and didn't get it done…he abandonded the 3 Navy icebreakers and new base). You are too partisan. This is a crsis for the country not a chance for one leader or another to strut.

  • Reg

    “The only way to defend the Arctic is to leave it under ice.”
    – Craig

    Yes, and would the Government also please pass a law that it always be sunny and warm on my days off?

  • musing

    Harper has got to take complete charge of these idiots who are working for him. If Harper loses a majority over stupid remarks it will be tragic Loyalty also should include we who vote Tory. One mans stupid remarks is not worth it. This guy should hand in his resignation instead forcing Hapers hand. he owes that to the party..

  • Bocanut

    According to some Putin is now the richest man in the world
    ,controls the Russian government and is a very scary guy.
    He's too young to retire,
    has the patient political savvy of an up and coming clone of Stalin,
    and has his pinky retapping a nuclear arsenal while the USA falls apart.
    Harper could stare him down while professor Dion might just confuse Putin enough
    with his GreenShift pitch to avoid Armageddon
    and according to
    the Lib spin meisters save the Kyoto Accord and make Putin even richer.
    I say send in Liz May to take care of Anti-Christ Putin.
    ;

  • East of Eden

    Now that is a lethal weapon of mass destruction – she can talk the ears off of anybody. I'm sure Putin would concede to anything just to remove her from the country. She has the potential to make sense, but her incessant talking and interrupting, not to mention “climate crisis” negates any sense she could make. It's too bad for her and too good for us that she comes across as arrogant and condescending, not to mention rude and disrespectful. Oh, and of course, as a Canadian, I am stupid.

  • Reg

    “too partisan”??? How much of the damage to our military inflicted by the Trudeau and Chretien/Martin regimes can we expect Harper to repair in less then three years with only a minority government? As Craig so aptly points out above, we are probably not going to need icebreakers. I think that Canada would be better off using its limited resources to acquire unmanned aircraft, submarines and Visby class ships.

  • Craig Hubley

    Kursk, you're sadly not worth responding to. Read what I wrote, and read what international law since 1945 has said about the conditions under which the rest of the world guarantees territorial sovereignty.

    Harper as PM radically reduces the odds of any international legal ruling in Canada's favour. Whatever Russia's reasons to want the Arctic, they will certainly present the arguments in exactly the form I have. And it will be up to a judge, not an apologist for a technically criminal regime, to decide what constitutes “confuse and conflate”. Certainly all the arguments I have used were used in other sovereignty cases.

    It would take Russia approximately five minutes to eradicate any large military assets in the far North in an actual war, two hours if they bother to use conventional weapons. No military posturing possible, the only argument for Canadian sovereignty is respect for the Arctic environment and peoples – exactly as they are, or were before global warming. And I explained exactly how to beef up the military credibly and in a form that would be quite difficult to take out using missiles. Even an airship can be landed and deflated and hidden more easily than a plane.

  • MrEd

    isn't this interesting…

    Copied from another blog…

    I was just reading the following from a Canadian Press article that is being distributed this AM:

    ———————————-
    The Professional Institute of the Public Service of Canada added its voice to those clamouring for Ritz's ouster after the minister told “tasteless” jokes about listeriosis during a conference call at the height of the outbreak.

    “Minister Ritz has repeatedly disappointed the professional scientists and inspectors who work for him during the listeria crisis,” institute president Michele Demers said in a statement.
    ————————————-

    Going to the Professional Institute of the Public Service of Canada website, one can find the following announcement:

    ————————————–
    Important Federal Election Information

    The election campaign is in full swing and the Institute has mobilized its resources to attempt to influence the results of the vote on October 14.
    ————————————–

    So there you have it. The Left (Canadian Press) helping the Left (Professional Institute of the Public Service of Canada) helping the Left (The Liberal Party of Canada). Now that's what you call teamwork

  • Craig Hubley

    Kursk, you're sadly not worth responding to. Read what I wrote, and read what international law since 1945 has said about the conditions under which the rest of the world guarantees territorial sovereignty.

    Harper as PM radically reduces the odds of any international legal ruling in Canada's favour. Whatever Russia's reasons to want the Arctic, they will certainly present the arguments in exactly the form I have. And it will be up to a judge, not an apologist for a technically criminal regime, to decide what constitutes “confuse and conflate”. Certainly all the arguments I have used were used in other sovereignty cases.

    It would take Russia approximately five minutes to eradicate any large military assets in the far North in an actual war, two hours if they bother to use conventional weapons. No military posturing possible, the only argument for Canadian sovereignty is respect for the Arctic environment and peoples – exactly as they are, or were before global warming. And I explained exactly how to beef up the military credibly and in a form that would be quite difficult to take out using missiles. Even an airship can be landed and deflated and hidden more easily than a plane.

  • Craig Hubley

    I expect a full brief in international law on these questions would run to more than 50 pages. My summary was as short as I could make it, sorry I cannot reduce it to the attack-ad length that you evidently prefer.

    As for the theory that sunspots or something cause warming, it's worth investigating but not to the exclusion of action on the AGW theory. We must act on the consensus of the overwhelming number of scientists who studied the question. And radical efficiency measures actually save money and reduce resource conflicts so they are essential anyway if we want to live in peace on this planet. As some of us do.

    I don't know who my “valient leader” is nor even what “valient” means. Certainly it would be both profitable and provide many side benefits to cut reliance in fossil fuels in half. Combustion is becoming obsolete as more effective energy pathways become available, some of them mimicking efficient animal/plant systems.

    I'm glad to know I make 50K annually. Where do I pick this up? Presuming you mean “assume I make…” the answer is that almost anyone could survive on a 35 thousand dollar pay cheque and live as if they made 50, if they were to 1.spend their income tax cuts on improving the energy performance of their home and vehicle 2. learn to cook 3. garden intensively on their own roof or balcony or yard at least expensive things like fresh herbs or lettuce 4. entirely cut out expensive hobbies especially those that involve motors or increase insurance costs, like ATV riding 5. shift over gradually to lines of work that don't require them to commute to some big building and park a car. If they can eliminate the car altogether, an expense that can cost as much as half a million dollars over your lifetime, they'll find a lot of money left over at the end of each month. So-called “green mortgages” rely on this massive cost savings to finance higher acquisition costs for urban condos where you don't need a car.

    By “get with the program” presumably you mean the program of destroying the atmosphere and causing more genocidal hurricanes in the Caribbean? Melting the Arctic and pumping out fuel until one of these destroyed peoples decides to nuke the pipeline? Turning the Prairies into a permanent hot dust bowl ? Hm.. Gee I'll have to consider it.

    The EI system in both Canada and the US is near collapse as is social security/insurance. Consequences of a long-lived population. That is, a symptom of success. I agree that issue needs more media attention. I don't think it was unwise to avoid paying banks and instead borrow from future seniors, given the monetary system as it stands. Serious reform to that system may now be possible now that it's more or less exploded and the Federal Reserve bails out banks selectively. If they can print half a trillion dollars to bail out creditors they can print the same to modernize the trains, planes, automobiles and building stock. It'd pay off better. Can you get with that program?

  • MrEd

    isn't this interesting…

    Copied from another blog…

    I was just reading the following from a Canadian Press article that is being distributed this AM:

    ———————————-
    The Professional Institute of the Public Service of Canada added its voice to those clamouring for Ritz's ouster after the minister told “tasteless” jokes about listeriosis during a conference call at the height of the outbreak.

    “Minister Ritz has repeatedly disappointed the professional scientists and inspectors who work for him during the listeria crisis,” institute president Michele Demers said in a statement.
    ————————————-

    Going to the Professional Institute of the Public Service of Canada website, one can find the following announcement:

    ————————————–
    Important Federal Election Information

    The election campaign is in full swing and the Institute has mobilized its resources to attempt to influence the results of the vote on October 14.
    ————————————–

    So there you have it. The Left (Canadian Press) helping the Left (Professional Institute of the Public Service of Canada) helping the Left (The Liberal Party of Canada). Now that's what you call teamwork

  • D

    For sure, if we had spent more money DND during the Liberal years we would be able to push back the Russian’s!!!!

    Reg,
    Are you dumb, a retards or just am illiterate neocon? It’s not always about money. Sometime it’s just about sheer manpower.

    The Russians can overtake us now and whenever they feel like it. The only thing that holding them back is the U”S. That’s it, that’s all. You can spend 50B tomorrow but if you don’t have troops to send north it wont make a difference.

    Get real, we have to make a deal with the U.S if we ever hope to have some sort of control over the area.

    And for those of you who think that the U.S is the real deal, just move South and get the fuck out of MY COUNTRY.

  • D

    For sure, if we had spent more money DND during the Liberal years we would be able to push back the Russian’s!!!!

    Reg,
    Are you dumb, a retards or just am illiterate neocon? It’s not always about money. Sometime it’s just about sheer manpower.

    The Russians can overtake us now and whenever they feel like it. The only thing that holding them back is the U”S. That’s it, that’s all. You can spend 50B tomorrow but if you don’t have troops to send north it wont make a difference.

    Get real, we have to make a deal with the U.S if we ever hope to have some sort of control over the area.

    And for those of you who think that the U.S is the real deal, just move South and get the fuck out of MY COUNTRY.

  • Dave

    And as we all know, Harper has kept every single one of his last election’s promises on the Arctic sovereignty file, and absolutely none of them were made as part of a porkbarrel electoral plan:

    OTTAWA: Thursday, December 22, 2005

    Today, I am outlining the Conservative Party’s plan to stand up for our Arctic sovereignty. It is an integral part of our “Canada First” defence commitment. We will budget $5.3 billion over five years beyond the current government defence planning levels as I announced in Trenton, Ontario last week. In order to ensure sovereignty over our land, waters, and airspace in Canada’s north, a Conservative government will take the following measures:

    • We will create a new Arctic national sensor system to monitor our northern waters for submarines and other vessels.
    • We will purchase three new heavy naval ice breakers, capable of carrying troops. These ships will be built right here in Canada.
    • We will build a new combined military civilian deep water docking facility in the Iqaluit region. At least 500 sailors will be committed for operating these icebreakers and the docking facility.
    • We will deploy new fixed wing search-and-rescue aircraft in Yellowknife, and replace existing utility aircraft.
    • We will deploy new unmanned aerial vehicle or UAV squadrons in CFB Comox and CFB Goose Bay, in addition to upgraded aurora aircraft for continuous surveillance of all three of our coasts.
    • We will establish a new Arctic army training centre with around 100 regular force personnel in the area of Cambridge Bay on the Northwest Passage.
    • The new 650-strong airborne battalion, to be stationed at CFB Trenton, will be capable of providing emergency response anywhere in the Arctic, including areas inaccessible by road or helicopter.
    • And we will expand and revitalize the Canadian Rangers, the vital northern defence force that helps establish our sovereignty in remote Arctic communities.

  • Dave

    And as we all know, Harper has kept every single one of his last election’s promises on the Arctic sovereignty file, and absolutely none of them were made as part of a porkbarrel electoral plan:

    OTTAWA: Thursday, December 22, 2005

    Today, I am outlining the Conservative Party’s plan to stand up for our Arctic sovereignty. It is an integral part of our “Canada First” defence commitment. We will budget $5.3 billion over five years beyond the current government defence planning levels as I announced in Trenton, Ontario last week. In order to ensure sovereignty over our land, waters, and airspace in Canada’s north, a Conservative government will take the following measures:

    • We will create a new Arctic national sensor system to monitor our northern waters for submarines and other vessels.
    • We will purchase three new heavy naval ice breakers, capable of carrying troops. These ships will be built right here in Canada.
    • We will build a new combined military civilian deep water docking facility in the Iqaluit region. At least 500 sailors will be committed for operating these icebreakers and the docking facility.
    • We will deploy new fixed wing search-and-rescue aircraft in Yellowknife, and replace existing utility aircraft.
    • We will deploy new unmanned aerial vehicle or UAV squadrons in CFB Comox and CFB Goose Bay, in addition to upgraded aurora aircraft for continuous surveillance of all three of our coasts.
    • We will establish a new Arctic army training centre with around 100 regular force personnel in the area of Cambridge Bay on the Northwest Passage.
    • The new 650-strong airborne battalion, to be stationed at CFB Trenton, will be capable of providing emergency response anywhere in the Arctic, including areas inaccessible by road or helicopter.
    • And we will expand and revitalize the Canadian Rangers, the vital northern defence force that helps establish our sovereignty in remote Arctic communities.