308
Arctic Yearbook 2015
defense hawk corner as well. Alongside the Arctic’s scientific community, an intelligence community
should be constructed with an Arctic Intelligence Forum at its core. Properly constructed, this forum
should serve to transparently display security developments across the region, not just through a
military lens but also a military-industrial one. Where possible, Arctic states should also engage in joint
military exercises. And finally, as use of the Northern Sea Route increases, both tourism and trade are
bound to increase in lockstep. To help coordinate efforts across the region, an Arctic Coast Guard,
bringing together the resources and manpower of the eight Arctic states, would be the strongest
showing of cooperation yet.
Arctic regional forum
Lowering the barriers to entry and bringing in a diverse set of voices to complement those of
stakeholders has been the hallmark of ASEAN as exemplified by the ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF).
When the forum is held, dozens of states join in consultation to discuss the region’s defining issues.
As framed by former Australian Foreign Minister Gareth Evans, ARF succeeds in building “security
with others rather than against them” (Acharya 2009: 199). Arctic states and the Arctic Council have
endeavored to be more inclusive through rhetoric, but in reality there remains a void. As discussed in
the third policy prescription, Arctic cooperation needs to do a better job including non-littoral states.
Similarly, the Arctic states, again working through the Arctic Council, should strengthen
communication and cooperation with non-regional actors expressing interest in the region. Asian
states, as diverse as China, Singapore, and India, have sent ministers to the Circumpolar North to
build partnerships, and often these overtures are met with a cold reception. The present Arctic
governing culture viewing interest by non-regional actors with suspicion should be replaced by a
culture of tempered trust, and an Arctic Regional Forum can help to break down those barriers
through constructive engagement.
Arctic Economic Community
Hardly unique to Southeast Asia, but certainly a defining economic feature of the region, is an
integrated economic community. Arctic states need not look that far for an economic exemplar –
functionalism thrives in their backyard through the European Union (EU). Building on the EU model,
Oran Young has suggested the creation of an “Arctic Development Bank,” especially when
considering that “Arctic communities exhibit a number of features that are characteristic of lessdeveloped economies” (Young 1992: 222). While the establishment of such a bank would have to be
parallel to, and not within, the Arctic Council governing nucleus, such economic cooperation could
help to lift the tide of poverty found in indigenous communities. Not only helping to improve the
condition of depressed communities, an Arctic Development Bank would share fiscal risk across
Arctic states. Thus, a mutually assured (financial) destruction system would persist whereby if one
state becomes intransigent, all parties will suffer economic repercussions. Spillover and biased options
of this nature will help to secure the region.
Toward an Arctic Way