NewsBreakingOnline

Oil and mineral deals mean money and jobs, but Inuit leaders are concerned about the lack of a national debate on industrialisation and what it means for the traditional way of life “I certainly have seen the benefits that can come from [oil] royalties. Schools are better. There are swimming pools, gymnasium, cars – and jobs – all the result of billions of dollars.” Patricia Cochran, a former chair of the Inuit Circumpolar Council from Alaska, expresses the view of many indigenous people on industrial development in the Arctic. Vast oil and mineral wealth have brought huge benefits to some communities. But her own conflicted feelings about development neatly sum up the dilemma that indigenous leaders in the region face. In Barrow – Alaska’s oil capital – there are also high rates of suicide and depression, while offshore drilling is a threat to subsistence whaling and the hunting of seals and walrus, she points out. So despite the benefits, Cochran is personally quite negative about industrial development and questions the wider benefit to society. “I personally have a problem with it. I was raised in a traditional way and regard it as my job to be a steward of the land. I see this [industrialised] world of hedonism and consumption as a sign we have lost our moral compass.” And there are fears that the vast sums on offer can sometimes be too tempting. Aqqaluk Lynge, former president of the council, says the wave of money that big multinationals bring to their lobbying “overwhelms” local community organisations. “We have questions about how the democratic process is gone about and how decisions are reached,” he said. “How can we survive as a people under the pressure that comes from oil companies whose daily income can be higher than our annual budget? “Arctic people themselves must have the time to look into [proposed industrial projects] to ensure we are not risking losing our country, self-rule or livelihoods.” Lynge, a continuing activist based in Nuuk, the capital of Greenland, is most concerned about the decision by the government there to allow British-based oil explorer, Cairn Energy , to drill last summer and again this year . But he is also worried about moves by Canadian metals group, Alcoa , to try to press ahead with plans to build a massive aluminium smelter on the island. The Inuit leader accepts Greenland ministers have the democratic right to negotiate and to reach agreements with companies. But he says the consultation process is still fatally undermined by the imbalance between the financial resources of Cairn and the like, compared to that available to local indigenous communities. Greenland, whose population is 80% Inuit, has recently won a measure of self-rule from its traditional colonial masters, Denmark. The new government in Nuuk is desperately keen to win complete independence and understands this is impossible while the country is dependent on financial handouts from Copenhagen. But Inuuteq Holm Olsen , Greenland deputy foreign minister, says that environmental concerns should be balanced against economics. “We welcome focus and attention on environmental issues … What we don’t welcome is the notion that there should not be any industrial development in the name of environmental protection.” Lynge says he realises that Cairn and Alcoa may offer a get-rich-quick route for Greenland and therefore a fast-track to political self-determination. But he says that rushing into oil and mineral exploitation deals risks drowning out a proper debate within the country about the pros and cons of industrialisation which could further undermine the traditional Inuit way of life based around fishing and hunting. “We don’t have the proper democratic infrastructure in place for a public hearing mechanism. So Cairn can knock on one [government] door and win agreement for their plans. This is a problem. “We are not against development in general as such but what we really want to see is sustainable development that will enable us to live in the future in the way we have for hundreds of years around fishing. We know oil and gas is not ultimately sustainable because it will run out.” Other concerns are more particular – such as where the kind of skilled workforce will come from to deal with any oil or other largescale industrial schemes. Greenland’s workforce is just 32,000 people. If large numbers of workers are brought in from outside, indigenous people risk becoming a minority. There is also a fear that big business can use its financial muscle to buy off opposition while not having its own track records fully investigated. “Propaganda can be done in simple ways. Promises to give lots of work or money to local communities: people tend to say ‘yes’ to these things without necessarily thinking them through the consequences,” said Lynge. Inuit in Canada have 40 years’ experience with oil so have found their own way of accommodating change. But even there, local leaders of indigenous people have mixed views about who is really benefiting. And overall the “community” representing indigenous people is split down the middle over the issue. Certainly the big oil companies that have been active in the seas off Alaska since the late 1980s are keen to be seen consulting local people. Robert Blaauw, the Anglo-Dutch company’s spokesman on the Arctic said: “Many coastal native communities depend on fishing and hunting of sea mammals not only for survival but also to keep alive a cultural centrepiece that has thrived for centuries. With that experience comes a deep knowledge of the Arctic environment … We continue to be humbled by what we don’t know and we are constantly looking for ways to incorporate traditional knowledge into our operations. Not just for the advancement of our project, but out of respect for those who will live off the ocean long after we are gone.” Ove Gudmestad , a professor of marine and Arctic technology at the University of Stavanger in Norway, carries out academic research which is useful to oil companies, and has travelled widely in the far north region. He believes there are practical problems and a fundamental lack of trust between indigenous people and the oil industry. “Of course it is important to take local knowledge into account, but it is hard to speak local languages. Whether it is in the US or Norway, fishermen do not trust the politicians or the NPD [ Norwegian Petroleum Directorate ] – never mind the oil companies.” Gudmestad said local people were rightly wary that they could get sucked into a legal dispute that could last for decades and for which the oil companies are far better prepared and resourced. “Just remember that in the US for every petroleum engineer being trained there are 200 lawyers,” he jokes. Lynge would like to see a more holistic look at the future for the Arctic in the light of climate change which already threatens some coastal communities with flooding and dislocation. “I don’t like the way that the debate seems to be framed around the industrial opportunities created by global warming. I would rather see a much better study about how climate change will affect fish stocks and renewable energy sources to see what we can survive on in future.” Polar regions Mining Land rights Energy Fossil fuels Oil Oil Commodities Mining Arctic Greenland Alaska United States Indigenous peoples Terry Macalister guardian.co.uk