Part I - Diplomacy and deterrence in the Northwest Passage
The Arctic’s geopolitical landscape is shifting. Rapid ice melt exposes vast mineral deposits and new shipping routes, is drawing intense global interest. Reports suggest the United States and Russia may explore bilateral agreements to exploit Arctic resources, potentially sidelining Canada and Nordic states (1). Whether substantiated or not, such prospects signal a broader challenge for Canada: safeguarding its sovereignty over the Northwest Passage (NWP), a waterway Canada claims as internal but the U.S. regards as an international strait (2-3). The disagreement escalated in2019 during a high-level Arctic Council meeting, when Mike Pompeo, the Secretary of State under the first Trump administration, described Canada’s claim over the Northwest Passage as “illegitimate” (4).
However, Canada reaffirmed its claim over the Northwest Passage in its Arctic Foreign Policy, released in 2024, stating: 'Canada will maintain strong defence capabilities in its internal Arctic waters, including in the Northwest Passage' (5).
This disagreement, rooted in decades of legal and strategic tension, risks escalation if unaddressed. Canada cannot rely on goodwill or past alliances to protect its interests. Drawing on the legacy of Senator Pascal Poirier, who championed Arctic ownership as early as 1907, Ottawa must pursue a robust strategy encompassing diplomacy, military posture, public mobilization, and economic development to assert control over the NWP and counter emerging threats (6).
Diplomatic engagement
Resolving the NWP dispute demands proactive diplomacy, particularly with Washington. Canada has historical precedent to build upon. In 1907, Senator Pascal Poirier proposed four legal claims to assert Canada’s Arctic and NWP sovereignty, including the so-called ‘Sector Theory’, laying a rhetorical foundation for future efforts (7). By the 1980s, Prime Minister Brian Mulroney’s government advanced this cause, presenting legal and historical arguments during negotiations that produced the 1988 Arctic Cooperation Agreement (8). Though the U.S. never endorsed Canada’s position, those talks underscored Ottawa’s determination.
Canada should now initiate high-level discussions with U.S. counterparts. The strategic case is compelling: recognizing the NWP as Canadian waters strengthens North American security. While Canada and the U.S. collaborate closely under North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD) for continental defence, recent shifts in U.S. policy - such as the 2025 Executive Order on Restoring America’s Maritime Dominance, which in Section 18 pledges to "ensure the security and leadership of Arctic waterways" - signal a more assertive American posture (9). Leaving the NWP designated as an international strait not only invites strategic ambiguity but also risks eroding Canada's sovereignty over a critical northern passage. Russia, with its unmatched Arctic fleet, or China, which labels itself a “near-Arctic state,” could deploy vessels for reconnaissance under freedom-of-navigation principles (10). Ottawa must emphasize that a secure NWP benefits both nations, preventing hostile access to North America’s northern flank. Direct talks could revisit the 1988 framework, seeking mutual concessions to align interests.
Engagement should extend beyond the U.S. Canada shares Arctic priorities with Norway, Denmark, and Iceland. Convening a regional dialogue or issuing joint statements on territorial integrity would amplify Ottawa’s position, reinforcing its claims without isolating Washington (11). Diplomacy must balance firmness with collaboration to avoid missteps.
Military reinforcement
Sovereignty requires credible defence capabilities. Canada has outlined plans to expand Arctic infrastructure, new bases, radar stations, and patrol vessels but implementation lags (12). The NWP needs fortified defences: coastal surveillance systems, drone units for real-time monitoring, and fighter squadrons positioned for rapid response. Russia’s Arctic dominance, marked by advanced icebreakers and outposts, sets a high bar (13). While Canada need not match this scale, it must deter challenges by establishing a credible presence, even amid occasional policy divergence with close allies like the U.S.
Ottawa’s shift toward European defence suppliers is pragmatic, possibly enabling faster procurement of ships, aircraft, and systems to bolster the Canadian Armed Forces (14). Conducting joint military exercises with the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) partners near the NWP - particularly with Denmark, given the Kingdom’s security responsibility for Greenland - as well as with Norway, France, or the U.K. would demonstrate resolve. These maneuvers, carefully coordinated to complement NORAD commitments, project strength and multilateral support. For example, a combined naval drill in Baffin Bay could test the ability of the forces to operate together while signaling Canada’s vigilance. Military enhancements are not about confrontation but about ensuring Ottawa’s claims are respected in a contested region.
--
Abbas Qaidari is an independent international security analyst based in British Columbia, and former senior fellow at the Center for Strategic Studies. His analyses have appeared in High North News, Policy Options, Al-Monitor, the Atlantic Council and many U.S.-based platforms.
E: Qaidariabbas@gmail.com
X: https://x.com/AbbasQaidari
PART I REFERENCES:
(1) https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2025-02-26/us-russia-mull-cooperation-on-arctic-trade-routes-exploration
(2) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XW6otNpfOWw
(3) https://brownpoliticalreview.org/the-u-s-canada-northwest-passage-dispute/
(4) https://www.ibanet.org/article/3eeb2f4f-abc9-4944-a1cd-2908cc83a827
(5) https:/www.international.gc.ca/gac-amc/assets/pdfs/publications/arctic-arctique/arctic-policy-politique-en.pdf
(6) https://lawjournal.mcgill.ca/article/canadian-claims-to-territorial-sovereignty-in-the-arctic-regions/
(7) https://www.thearcticinstitute.org/brief-history-lines-arctic/
(8) https://www.treaty-accord.gc.ca/text-texte.aspx?id=101701
(9) https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/04/restoring-americas-maritime-dominance/
(10) https://www.rand.org/pubs/articles/2022/what-does-chinas-arctic-presence-mean-to-the-us.html
(11) https://www.highnorthnews.com/en/first-canada-nordic-strategic-dialogue-key-safer-future-us-region
(12) https://www.highnorthnews.com/en/canadas-arctic-ascendancy-leading-west-shifting-north
(13) https://www.wsj.com/politics/national-security/russia-china-artic-sea-nato-2ca1ea10
(14) https://apnews.com/article/canada-defense-european-union-trump-f35-b2ced39c577c8dff6d3718007440db5c