Defence Minister Bill Blair, front left to right, Nunavut MLA Janet Brewster, Prime Minister Mark Carney, Nunavut Premier P.J. Akeeagok, Nunavut Education Minister Pamela Gross, Chief of Defence Staff Gen. Jennie Carignan, along with members of the Canadian Rangers, back left, and members of the Canadian Armed Forces, back right, pose for a photo after an announcement at a Canadian Armed Forces forward-operating location in Iqaluit, Nunavut, on March 18.Sean Kilpatrick/The Canadian Press
The vast territory of the Arctic – of Inuit Nunangat, or Inuit homeland – is starkly beautiful. It encompasses 40 per cent of Canada’s total land mass and 70 per cent of its coastline.
What’s beautiful, too, is how the region shows Canada what is possible when it works with Indigenous people: Inuit Nunangat is co-managed by Inuit and the federal government thanks to functional modern-day treaties with the Crown and Canada that are delivering results.
The relationship between Inuit and Canada – one that has been carefully rebuilt, largely by the previous Liberal government, after a history of pain and forced relocation – should be viewed as a shared strength, leaned on in times of both need and prosperity. And modern agreements that address self-government and resource management, said Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami president Natan Obed, could even give Canada a helpful relational guidebook to dealing with sovereignty threats from the United States.
“If we look at our history, we understand we have tremendous lessons to learn from the last time this happened toward the end of the Second World War and into the Cold War era, when the Canadian government took it upon themselves to move Inuit like human flag poles,” said Mr. Obed. He’s referring to the forced relocation of Inuit off the land and the mass killings of Inuit dogs, to settle the people permanently where Canada wanted them, largely in the 1950s, in the name of Canadian sovereignty. More than 60 military facilities were built during that era – distant early-warning sites, pine tree sites, strategic monitoring and defence sites across the Arctic – but none were built with Inuit participation or access. In fact, the community infrastructure was built, in large part, by the Americans, as a result of Cold War agreements.
Canada has worked hard over the years to turn its relationship with Inuit around, and it has a long way to go. But the ways in which the country’s two dominant parties have treated the Arctic on the campaign trail have revealed what’s at stake in this election, and illustrate two starkly different visions of Canada: either a path to potential progress and respect with Inuit, or a regressive approach that could take the country back to the old, broken ways.
“We have an opportunity to build on agreements with Canada – build on the land claim agreements. We are ready to play a more integral role on what is to come. We are looking to be a more respected partner in the nation-state sense,” said Mr. Obed, adding that Inuit would work with whatever party is elected. “I don’t feel Canadians understand or appreciate the essential place Inuit have in the composition of Canada as a nation-state.”
Pierre Poilievre certainly does not seem to have a clue.
So far, we’ve heard nothing but sabre-rattling from the Conservatives, both federally and provincially. When the Arctic or northern Ontario comes up for the Tories, it’s in conversations about the urgent need to bypass laws that protect the environment and safeguard endangered species, or about disregarding Indigenous rights to dig out critical minerals.
On Mr. Poilievre’s Feb. 10 trip to Iqaluit to talk about building a new defence base, for instance, he didn’t even invite or inform Mr. Obed or Nunavut Premier P.J. Akeeagok. The Conservatives have released two strategies concerning the Arctic, which speak of military might being the cornerstone of a strong region – not its people or policies.
It is true that the Liberals have a spotty track record when it comes to Indigenous relations. But we have heard Mark Carney talk about actively engaging Indigenous people in critical mineral extraction, rather than just sweeping us aside.
Mr. Carney made Iqaluit one of his first stops after becoming Prime Minister. When he met with Inuit leadership on March 18, he wore a blue atigii, a traditional Inuit pullover jacket that he was gifted, and made an announcement that, yes, was dominated by a $6-billion Arctic radar system, but also spoke of the need for housing, proper infrastructure and power. One of the most natural pictures of Mr. Carney I’ve seen came from that trip: in it, he’s holding a cup of coffee and laughing with a group of Canadian Rangers.
If there is a shining light to guide us forward in achieving respectful Indigenous relations, it is how Inuit have grown their relationship with Canada in recent years. The choice of what kind of country Canadians want to build is clear, then, based on the sharp contrast on display: one that bolsters a relationship of learned respect in shared defence of Canada’s north, or one that breaks that trust and puts decision-making back in Ottawa’s hands – and tells Inuit about sovereignty and defence without actually listening to them.