[Congressional Record Volume 169, Number 78 (Tuesday, May 9, 2023)]
[Senate]
[Pages S1572-S1575]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




    THE STANDING COMMITTEE OF PARLIAMENTARIANS OF THE ARCTIC REGION

  Ms. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, I would welcome the majority leader to 
stay and listen to my comments this evening because I am speaking about 
the Arctic, and as a Senator from New York, he could certainly 
appreciate the role that the Arctic plays.
  Mr. SCHUMER. If the Senator would yield, I love the Arctic. I have 
never been there, but I have seen many films and movies about it. I am 
sure her remarks will be excellent, but I must give a speech at the 
bipartisan spouses' dinner. So I regret that I will not hear her 
remarks directly, but I will scan them in the Record.
  Ms. MURKOWSKI. The majority leader is invited to the Arctic at any 
time of his choosing. January is a fine time.
  Mr. President, I do share with colleagues--they hear it from me quite 
frequently--that the United States is an Arctic nation. Hailing from 
the fine State of Georgia, in the South, the Presiding Officer might 
not think or appreciate the role that your State plays in the Arctic, 
but each of our 50 States--each of our 50 States--sees benefit, sees 
opportunity because we are an Arctic nation. And we are an Arctic 
nation by virtue of the fact that, in my home State of Alaska, parts of 
it sit above the Arctic Circle.
  It is our status as a nation. It is our good fortune, I think, as a 
nation. We have opportunities to come together as Arctic nations and 
work on its common challenges and shared opportunities, and we had such 
an opportunity

[[Page S1573]]

just a couple of weeks back when, here in Washington, DC, we were able 
to be an Arctic host nation in welcoming the Standing Committee of 
Parliamentarians of the Arctic Region for our conference. We held it 
here in the Capitol.
  I think many have heard of the Arctic Council. The Arctic Council is 
the governing body. It is the primary institution for intergovernmental 
cooperation in the Arctic. You may know that, currently, as of this 
moment, the Arctic Council is chaired by Russia. Obviously, it is very 
challenging right now, at a time when Russia is engaged in this 
horrible war against Ukraine.
  I will have an opportunity to speak, in just a few moments, to that, 
but as we think about the Arctic Council, I think it is also important 
to recognize that the standing committee--the Standing Committee of 
Parliamentarians of the Arctic Region--is also a body that is quite 
important. It facilitates a biennial gathering of representatives from 
the various parliaments and legislatures of the eight Arctic nations. 
There are also permanent participants, indigenous groups that are part 
of the Arctic parliamentarians, as well as representatives from the 
Nordic Council and other councils. As an entity, then, the standing 
committee helps to make recommendations to the Arctic Council itself.
  But the standing Committee is made up of policymakers, again, from 
these Arctic nations coming together, talking about the issues in our 
respective regions and how together we can guide the broader Arctic 
toward a more sustainable future. I have been involved as a member of 
the standing committee for nearly my entire tenure here in the U.S. 
Senate.
  I am the United States' sole representative on the standing 
committee, and I am now very privileged to serve as its vice chair and 
have done so now for the past 3 years.
  We hold our conferences in, obviously, other parts of the Arctic. We 
have been to Helsinki in Finland. We have been in Reykjavik in Iceland. 
We have been up to Norway, Sweden, and several times in Alaska itself, 
one meeting in Anchorage and then a ministerial meeting held in 
Fairbanks.
  And then, as I mentioned, just a couple weeks ago now, we held our 
conference for 2023 here in Washington, DC. It is not exactly an Arctic 
capital here--I get that--but it is a place where we could all come 
together to convene and discuss the challenges and the opportunities 
that we face in the Far North.
  So we were proud to welcome representatives from five Arctic nations 
at the conference. In addition to the United States, we had delegates 
present from Canada, Denmark, Greenland, Iceland, Norway, and Sweden.
  (Mr. KELLY assumed the Chair.)
  And I am going to share with you and those here in the Chamber a map 
of the Arctic region. I think, when most people think about the Arctic, 
they think about the globe, and there is the top of the globe. You have 
that piece up there that looks so far and so remote. The Presiding 
Officer is probably the only one in this Chamber who has had an 
opportunity to see the Arctic as it really is. The Presiding Officer 
was up there in space and had a chance to see the Arctic region laid 
out as it is.
  Here is Alaska here, Canada, Greenland, and Iceland, just on the 
outside; obviously, Russia, with the vast, vast territory above the 
Arctic Circle; Finland, Sweden, Norway above here.
  But not only do we include in our delegation representatives from the 
Arctic nations, but we also include those from the European Parliament.
  We had a representative from the Nordic Council, the West Nordic 
Council, the Saami Council, the Gwich'in Council International, the 
Aleut International Association, and the Arctic Athabaskan Council.
  We were able to meet over in the Capitol Visitor Center for a morning 
of open discussion. We began with remarks from the chair of the 
Standing Committee, Aaja Chemnitz Larsen. Aaja is from Greenland. She 
is a member of the Danish Folketing.
  We take care of the business and presentations from not only our 
perspective here in the United States. We had a good strong discussion 
about the United States and our role, how we have stepped into 
a greatly amplified role when it comes to Arctic leadership, personnel, 
policies, as well as infrastructure.

  Following our meetings, we were able to go over to the Norwegian 
Embassy and held a policy-focused panel. We had a reception with the 
Fulbright Arctic Scholars and a pretty robust Arctic working dinner. We 
called it our Arctic salon to kind of close out the day. But it was an 
opportunity to really come together and share many of the issues that 
these Arctic nations are dealing with today.
  Obviously, climate change was front and center as part of these 
discussions. We talked about the threats from coastal erosion and 
increasing wildland fires that we are seeing in the tundra and taiga 
areas, the challenges that a warming climate brings with food security 
issues, and, certainly, from Alaska's perspective, the challenges that 
we are seeing with our fisheries--a subsistence identity that is key 
and central to so many of not only our Native people around the State 
but so many who live a subsistence lifestyle.
  So many of us, as Arctic nations, share common challenges like lack 
of core infrastructure, our need for sustainable economic development, 
and the priorities for our First Peoples. We talked about what we see 
with the rise of shipping and trade, as well as new industries, such as 
mariculture. There are a lot of real positives that I think we are 
seeing, but we are also seeing significant shared challenges.
  So many are facing outmigration of young people. We are certainly 
seeing that in my State, but also in the Far North, in Canada and in 
some of the other areas, and, certainly, an issue in Greenland.
  We talked about housing shortages and what that means in Arctic 
environments. We talked a lot about mental health issues and the 
challenges that so many in the northern regions face, and public safety 
issues.
  There was so, so much that was on our plate, and, again, talking 
about challenges but also talking about some of the best practices. 
And, of course, you have to talk about the geopolitical landscape and 
how it is impacting these shared challenges and really how we move 
forward to address them.
  And you can't avoid this. You can't avoid these geopolitical 
discussions because the largest Arctic nation, Russia, is typically 
part of the standing committee. They are one of the eight Arctic 
nations. But this year they were not present. They were not welcomed. 
They were not represented due to their own doing, due to this 
catastrophic war in Ukraine.
  And the Presiding Officer and I know that is what happens when you 
move to declare war against a free and sovereign nation. There are 
extensive, there are far-reaching consequences. So they are not part of 
the discussions within the Arctic Council. They are not part of the 
discussions within the Standing Committee of the Arctic 
Parliamentarians. But I think we know that even though they are not 
part of these discussions, Russia continues to lean in, to exert its 
influence, its dominance, in the Arctic.
  After Finland's accession into NATO, we saw Russia step up its 
military drills in the Arctic. In recent years, we have seen increased 
military buildup. Again, even while Putin is prosecuting this awful 
criminal war in Ukraine, he is pushing resources to, again, put his 
military influence in an area that, for a period of years, has been 
relatively dormant.
  Just a couple of weeks ago, Russia has signed an agreement to 
strengthen cooperation with China in the region, signaling very clearly 
that, perhaps, for the multilateral discussions in the Arctic that they 
had been part of, as with the Arctic Council, now they are seeking to 
pursue a more bilateral strategy.
  So Russia is absolutely--absolutely--not stepping off the gas when it 
comes to its engagement and interest in the Arctic. So even though 
Russian parliamentarians might not be sitting with us, it is not as if 
we can ignore the elephant in the room.
  I think that the conversations that the parliamentarians had, again, 
a couple weeks ago, are worth sharing here, worth an entry into the 
Congressional Record, because the future of the Arctic is literally 
being defined as we speak--as we speak.
  There is more attention that is being paid to the Far North by more 
people and more nations with more varied interests than we have ever 
seen before,

[[Page S1574]]

and I think that there is a greater need for us here in the United 
States for cooperation and sharing best practices with friends and 
those with similar interests.
  Just last week, I had an opportunity to sit down with a member of the 
Japanese House of Representatives, Ms. Kamikawa. She is the head of the 
Polar Caucus, and she shared with me Japan's plans to build an 
icebreaker designed for research in the area.
  They are not an Arctic nation. Japan does not pretend to be a near-
Arctic nation, as China has self-labeled themselves, but they do 
believe that the area, the region is so significant and so important, 
and so how can they be a helpful participant? How can they help in that 
shared research? So to be able to cooperate in these ways, I think is 
key.

  I think those of us here in the United States, especially those of us 
who serve as policymakers, need to be aware of those other non-Arctic 
nations that are looking at the Arctic with a heightened sense of 
interest and desire to be either a participant or how they might take 
advantage of the Arctic.
  Don't get me wrong: We have got a very strong and inviting commitment 
from nearly all of our Arctic partners to work together to find 
solutions to the challenges and the issues that we face. I believe 
equally strongly that the United States has got to be a leader in 
advancing those solutions. For a long while, the United States was 
lagging behind. I had suggested we were not at the table, we were not 
in the game; but I can assure you, we have taken some very important 
steps. We have made progress. It has been noted by other nations, and 
it is good to see.
  We have taken some steps to put people and policies in place that 
will guide our actions in this very, very dynamic region. We are 
investing billions of dollars now in core infrastructure.
  Again, I need to remind colleagues, we are not talking about earmarks 
or even congressionally directed spending for Alaska. We are talking 
about national security investments--investments in our national Arctic 
strategy.
  You can't have coverage of the U.S. Arctic if you don't have a 
deepwater port. Right now, our deepwater port is down in the 
Aleutians--Dutch Harbor. It is 800 to 1,000 miles to get yourself up 
there into the Arctic.
  So we have moved ahead. The Port of Nome is coming on. It is going to 
be significant. It is going to be important. Hopefully, there will be 
just a system of deepwater ports in the Arctic.
  Investment has been made in broadband connectivity. You cannot have 
this extraordinary mass and be blanked out when it comes to Arctic 
communication--so everything we have done to invest not only in 
communications to communities in the North Slope but what it means to 
be in these waters--to be in these skies.
  I have had a pretty good day and a half. I just came back this 
afternoon from Alabama and Mississippi, where I was able to visit 
shipyards that are in the process now--Alabama shipyard is building out 
offshore patrol cutters--OPCs--that are going to be significant to us 
in the region.
  Even more exciting--I have been waiting for this for, I swear, 20 
years now--but I was able to go to Bollinger Shipyard down in 
Pascagoula and to actually see--actually see--where we are going to be 
building--hopefully, cutting steel by the end of this year--the first 
polar security cutter. It is the first polar security cutter that this 
country has built since the early 1970s. We are well, well, well 
overdue.
  We have authorized now six icebreakers. We have fully funded two. We 
are pushing hard to advance commercially available icebreakers. My hope 
is that we will get that resolved this year. The Coast Guard is 
committed to it. The administration is committed to it. We are all-in, 
and we need it. We need it because, right now--this is no great 
secret--but the United States has no icebreaker--no polar-strength 
icebreaker that is in our waters.
  We do have a polar-strength icebreaker, but she breaks out 
Antarctica. That is the requirement. She has been doing it for a long, 
long time. But that vessel doesn't see these Arctic waters. We have a 
medium-strength vessel that is very capable, the Healy, but we need to 
have our polar security cutters. We need them in the water. I was 
really encouraged to see the forward movement. It is coming. These 
ships are coming, and it is going to make a difference. They are part 
of our Arctic strategy.
  We have got an updated national strategy for the Arctic region. This 
came from the White House. We have got a new Goals and Objectives 
Report from the U.S. Arctic Research Commission. Every branch of the 
military has now developed its own strategy for the Far North. We have 
reestablished the Arctic Executive Steering Committee featuring the 
Deputy Secretaries or their equivalents from the Departments in the key 
Agencies. We have revived the Arctic Energy Office at DOE. We stood up 
the Ted Stevens Center for Arctic Security Studies. This is located in 
Anchorage. It is part of the Department of Defense; but like the other 
security centers that look out over the Pacific or Europe or Africa, 
this is specific and unique to the Arctic only with brilliant people 
who are thinking about where we sit in this extraordinary space.
  We have also convinced the State Department to establish an 
Ambassador at Large for the Arctic region, as many, many countries have 
already done. So the President has nominated a great guy. He is a 
fellow Alaskan, Dr. Mike Sfraga, to be the first person to hold this 
position. I am really looking forward to the Foreign Relations 
Committee--hopefully, they will be able to consider his nomination 
later this month and get him confirmed.
  I met with the Ambassador from Norway. Norway is set to assume the 
chairship of the Arctic Council on the 11th of May. This week, it is 
going to transfer from Russia to Norway.
  I asked the Ambassador what can the United States do to be most 
helpful to Norway as you resettle the Arctic Council. And he said: 
Confirm your Arctic Ambassador. So we need to do that.
  We made important progress in recent years, but what has happened so 
far is really only the beginning of what we need to do in and for the 
region, as we continue to face major challenges that I think take all 
of us to address.
  The Arctic's future must always be determined by the people of the 
Arctic. But having said that, there is good reason for us here in 
Congress to pay attention and a role for us to play in how to guide its 
future. And I have a pretty long list in that regard.
  I am dusting off my Arctic Commitment Act. It is a comprehensive 
package focused on security, shipping, research, and trade policy 
improvements.
  I mentioned the Arctic Ambassador position. We need to codify the 
Arctic Ambassador position into law. We need to grow our diplomatic 
capacity and our soft power.
  I feel pretty strongly. We need to ratify the Law of the Sea Treaty. 
We need to do this. We need to ensure that our rightful claims in these 
areas aren't snapped up by those who want to control as much territory 
and resources as possible.
  We need to do more to invest in our defense. Again, I mentioned our 
icebreakers, but also our Coast Guard, a naval presence, a missile 
defense, and advanced fighter jets that can respond to all threats, 
whether it is Russian Bear Bombers that are coming over just right 
here--coming right there--or whether it is these unidentified aerial 
objects the whole country is tracking as they are coming right up 
through the Bering Strait and across Alaska. We are on the frontlines.

  We need to invest even more in core infrastructure like water and 
wastewater, broadband--I mentioned--so that all those who live in the 
U.S. Arctic have access to basic necessities and a modern standard of 
living.
  We need to tap into some of the new opportunities, including for food 
security. I have got a measure that I am going to be introducing--we 
call it our ``Arctic ag'' bill--focusing on not necessarily traditional 
agriculture, so to speak, but things like mariculture, which will 
contribute to our growing food economy.
  We need to produce the resources that we need now and that we will 
need for decades to come. This means not just the recently approved 
Willow Project that was approved within the National Petroleum 
Reserve--and we are thankful that the administration saw the benefit of 
that--but we also

[[Page S1575]]

need to be looking to the commercialization of our vast natural gas 
resources, the build-out of our renewables and clean technologies like 
advanced nuclear power, the approval of new mines that can produce the 
minerals that we are going to need that is going to power our future. 
We need to do all of this while we work to address the issues of 
climate change by dramatically working to reduce our emissions and also 
finding solutions for adaptation which is just as critical.
  We have to be ready for new threats as they arise. As I mentioned, 
the enhancer, that growing relationship between Russia and China 
strengthening their ties--what we are seeing coming out of Russia right 
now is a move to ship oil to China through the Northern Sea Route. So 
they will be moving their oil through the Northern Sea Route, coming 
right through the Bering Straits here to deliver--to go down to China.
  When you look at choke points. It is 57 miles--57 miles--between 
mainland Russia and mainland United States right here--not a lot of 
room. We have got two islands across the middle: the Big Diomede and 
the Little Diomede, one Russian and one United States. But I am worried 
that what we may see are non-Polar Code-compliant tankers coming 
through these waters at a time when Russia is looking to do everything 
they can to evade Western sanctions. But I am concerned that we may see 
an accident. We may see some kind of a spill. And our response capacity 
is extraordinarily limited--potentially thousands of miles away.
  So there is a lot that we are watching; there is a lot that we have 
got to do. And I think that there is still not enough of us giving the 
Arctic the attention that it deserves. It is still harder than it 
should be to secure critical Arctic policy and investment.
  I know more and more Members of Congress are visiting the region. I 
think, maybe, I may have gotten a commitment from the majority leader 
to come and visit the Arctic--maybe not in January--but he says he 
likes the Arctic. But people need to see it for themselves to 
understand what we are talking about. So welcome all of you.
  But for those of you who aren't able to visit and, frankly, don't 
understand the significance of the region, I think--I think some still 
ask the question: Why bother? Why is the Arctic important? Why does it 
matter?
  And the answer to that--my answer to that is that the future of the 
Arctic matters more to the future of the Nation than most can possibly 
imagine. The Presiding Officer probably well-recalls a famous general 
by the name of Billy Mitchell. And General Mitchell, back in 1935, 
said:

       I believe that in the future, whoever holds Alaska will 
     hold the world. I think it is the most important strategic 
     place in the world.

  Billy Mitchell said that in 1935, and I think it is fair to say that 
the future has arrived, because General Mitchell is absolutely right. 
Alaska is the most strategic place because of our location, because we 
are part of an Arctic nation, and because we are sitting right on top 
of the world. We are sitting in the center of it. We are, oftentimes--
oftentimes--on the frontline of our Nation's sovereignty and defense. 
Now new cargo, new shipping trade routes are creating challenges, yes--
I have mentioned--but also economic opportunities that can deliver 
benefits all over the country--the investment in ships and planes and 
manufacturing facilities and everything else that that involves in 
creating jobs and furthering opportunities in every State in the 
country.
  When I was at the shipyard this morning, they had a map of the Lower 
48 States with the number of dollars--and I don't believe it was just 
dollars--but I think it was the number of dollars that comes to each 
State because of investments that are made purchasing, whether it is 
raw materials or built parts. You look at--48 States on that map now; 
there wasn't Alaska. We are not building any of that yet, but we are 
going to be hosting this. So it points to the value, whether you are 
from Arizona or whether you are from Georgia, in that you have a stake 
in the Arctic.

  As fellow Arctic parliamentarians, we say, in coming back to our 
conference, what happens in the Arctic doesn't stay in the Arctic. We 
know that it isn't frozen in time. It is not frozen in place. It really 
affects every single one of us and, I think, more by the year. I think 
the sooner folks realize that, the better, and the time is really now.
  On the heels of our meeting of the standing committee, as I 
mentioned, later this week, we will transition the chairship of the 
Arctic Council from Russia to Norway. We are hoping that transfer is 
going to be very quiet, very uneventful. There will be, I think, a fair 
amount of anticipation and, hopefully, relief on the 12th of May that 
we will begin to really renew our intergovernmental collaboration as 
Arctic nations, with Norway at the helm, working together to work 
through some common challenges but to do so much more to share best 
practices. I think here in the United States, we meet this with 
determination and commitment as we work to do our part as an Arctic 
nation.
  With that, I invite the Presiding Officer as well to come to the Far 
North and to the Arctic.
  I yield the floor.

                          ____________________