The issue features prominently on the agenda of The 2^nd annual Munk-Gordon Arctic Security Conference on the future of the Arctic Council, 17-18 January in Toronto. More than 100 participants from 15 nations are participating.

Full members of the Arctic Council are Canada, Russia, the United States, Norway, Finland, Sweden, Iceland and Denmark (Greenland): the eight countries with Arctic territory. Six northern indigenous groups—the Inuit Circumpolar Council, Arctic Athabaska Council, Gwich’in Council International, Sami Council, Russian Association of the Indigenous Peoples of the North (RAIPON) and Aleut International Association—wield strong influence as permanent participants. The Arctic Council is the only international organization that gives indigenous peoples a formal place at the table. Another six non-Arctic nations sit in as observers today: the UK, France, Germany, Spain, Poland and the Netherlands.

However, many more non-Arctic countries, which in addition to China, India and Brazil, include Japan, South Korea, the European Union and several individual European states, now want “observer” status, a step that some fear would significantly increase the influence of non-Arctic participants.

Many non-Arctic countries are interested in the Arctic as the “canary in the coal mine” that can teach them about how climate change will impact their own states. They are also interested in the potential access to the vast hydrocarbons and resources in the region and the cost-savings of using shorter Arctic shipping routes. China, as one example, has a research station in Norway’s northern Svalbard Islands and is building an 8,000 tonne icebreaker.

A survey last year by the Munk-Gordon Arctic Security Program found that Arctic residents view China as the least attractive potential partner in the region.

Canada and Russia are the strongest opponents of expansion. Some fear a greatly enlarged contingent of observers would overwhelm the current members, particularly the indigenous groups. Others, however, warn that if the non-Arctic states aren’t allowed at the table, they’ll take Arctic concerns to other international bodies such as the United Nations General Assembly, and the Council’s influence would diminish. On the other hand, membership fees charged to additional observers could help support the participation of the indigenous groups.

Another issue is whether the Council, originally intended to make recommendations to member governments with a focus on environmental and sustainable development issues, expand its mandate to matters such as security, and aim to become a source of legally binding decisions? Scandinavian countries are the strongest supporters of such changes but others, particularly the United States, do not wish to see the Council enlarge its scope.

The forum in Toronto will recommend the issues Canada should pursue as Council chair.