|
‘Arctic ambassador,’ or something less? Secretary of State John Kerry’s intent to name special representative for the Arctic draws mixed views from Alaska’s two senators Wesley Loy For Petroleum News
Secretary of State John Kerry’s recent announcement that he soon intends to name a “special representative for the Arctic region” has drawn mixed reaction from Alaska’s two U.S. senators.
Sen. Mark Begich, a Democrat, hailed the announcement, saying he has advocated for an “Arctic ambassador” since his election to the Senate in 2008.
Sen. Lisa Murkowski, a Republican, also welcomed Kerry’s news, but raised concerns about just how much authority the new position would carry. Specifically, Murkowski said she feared the special representative might not have the same clout as a full ambassador, which is what is really needed, she said.
In a Feb. 20 letter, Murkowski asked Kerry for a meeting to talk about the role and authority of the position.
“I am heartened that the State Department is placing a greater level of focus and attention on the Arctic,” Murkowski wrote. “I am gravely concerned, however, that the Special Representative will not be on par with our Arctic partners at international bilateral and multilateral events, nor will it have the authority within the U.S. Government to direct resources to the Far North and I welcome the opportunity to engage with you on these issues.”
Arctic’s rising profile The United States is an Arctic nation because of Alaska’s proximity to the Arctic Ocean.
The Arctic profile has risen in recent years, with climate change reducing ice cover and opening new waters to shipping or other industries. These changing conditions have heightened interest in staking national claims in Arctic, and in establishing policies on defense and resource development.
The United States in 2015 will take over as chair of the Arctic Council, an intergovernmental forum for promoting cooperation and coordination among Arctic states and indigenous communities. Other member states include Canada, Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, Russia and Sweden.
Kerry on Feb. 14 sent letters to Begich and Murkowski saying: “For a long time now, I’ve shared the view that the Arctic region really is the last global frontier, and the United States needs to elevate our attention and effort to keep up with the opportunities and consequences presented by the Arctic’s rapid transformation.”
Kerry continued: “I will be shortly naming a high level individual of substantial stature and expertise to serve as Special Representative for the Arctic Region.”
The secretary said he hoped to receive counsel from both Alaska senators to “identify the right person” for the job.
‘A national embarrassment’ The Obama administration rolled out a National Strategy for the Arctic Region in May 2013, and issued an implementation plan in January.
In a Feb. 14 press release responding to Kerry’s letter, Murkowski expressed general dissatisfaction with the Obama administration’s vigor on the Arctic.
“The White House’s lackluster efforts to seize the opportunities opening up in the Arctic have been a national embarrassment to this point,” Murkowski said. “The other Arctic nations are proceeding full steam ahead and even non-Arctic nations like Italy, India, China and South Korea are all making an Arctic push — while America slips further behind. Though I welcome the administration paying more attention and devoting more energy to an Arctic agenda, I question whether or not the title ‘Special Representative’ is on par with an Ambassador, a position I’ve consistently recommended. Seven of the eight Arctic nations have an Arctic Ambassador, and I’m not sure we are there yet. This position demands a high level official with expertise and Arctic knowledge in order to be on par with the international community and I seek clarity from Secretary Kerry on this.”
| 