The Right Honorable Mary Simon, former Governor General of Canada: The relevancy of the Arctic Council has not diminished. It has changed.
Gunn-Britt Retter, the Saami Council: I was saying that this is - this meeting will be significant either because it's the last one ever in the Arctic Council or the first one in the next phase
Morten Høgland, Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs: Up until that time...there was some kind of uncertainty. Is it possible?
David Balton, Belfer Center’s Arctic Initiative: The fact that the US and Russia could work together then remains a lesson that may even be applicable today. We can find things that we want to do and can do together.
Benjamin Strong, Emergency Prevention, Preparedness and Response Working Group: Sometimes you have to build trust with people that may not have trusted you for a while. The Arctic Council builds those relationships and builds those bridges.
Jennifer Spence, Harvard Arctic Initiative: To say that Arctic exceptionalism is dead is to miss some of the really amazing parts of the Arctic
Benjamin Strong: We have important work to do, and it will continue on well beyond, into the the next 30 years.
Rosa-Máren Magga, Indigenous Peoples’ Secretariat, podcast host: You're listening to This Way Up, the Arctic Council podcast bringing you stories and experiences from the Arctic. I’m Rosa-Máren Magga from the Indigenous Peoples’ Secretariat.
Jessica Cook, Arctic Council Secretariat, podcast host: And I’m Jessica Cook from the Arctic Council Secretariat. Let’s get into it.
Rosa-Máren Magga, podcast host: This year, 2026, marks the Arctic Council’s 30th anniversary. Jess, where were you in 1996 when the Council was established?
Jessica Cook, podcast host: Well, I was three. So probably playing in a sandbox or something.
Today we have a very special episode. We’re bringing in Arctic Council insiders to talk about the evolution of the Arctic Council, including today when we experience geopolitical uncertainty.
This is not a re-hash of the Arctic Council’s history. You’ll hear unique commentary and behind-the-scenes insights from those who have built the Council from the ground up – and shaped it over time.
Rosa-Máren Magga, podcast host: To start, we spoke with the Right Honorable Mary Simon. She was the 30th Governor General of Canada – the first Indigenous person to hold office. She was Canada's first Ambassador for Circumpolar Affairs – and she’s also known as the Mother of the Arctic Council.
Arctic Indigenous Peoples’ cooperation pre-dates the Council, and it was an important backdrop for its foundation. During her time as Canadian Ambassador for Circumpolar Affairs, Mary Simon was tasked with the role of establishing an Arctic Council. She talks about how she went into this task inspired by Indigenous people-to-people collaboration.
The Right Honorable Mary Simon: I started at the non-governmental organizational level for the Inuit Circumpolar Council. So it brought to the forefront what those issues were at the people's level, you know, people to people.
When the prime minister decided to appoint me as Canadian circumpolar ambassador, he gave me the responsibility of taking the job of creating this Arctic Council. So, my hopes were that the engagement that we had had amongst Indigenous groups across the country, amongst the Inuit as well as other Indigenous People like the Sámi, my wish was that that those agendas would be taken up by state governments.
Rosa-Máren Magga, podcast host: As the Arctic Council was being created, the role of Indigenous Peoples was heavily discussed – as was the topic of how decisions would be made.
Another person closely involved in the Arctic Council since its origins is Chief Bill Erasmus of the Arctic Athabaskan Council. He recalls those early days when these discussions were taking place.
Chief Bill Erasmus: I go back to the really early days of the Arctic Council when, in fact, before it was set up in Canada, I was one of the Chiefs. And there were people like Mary Simon and others who traveled amongst the Inuit communities and the Athabascan or the Dene and they talked to us about the possibility of setting up this entity that would deal with northern issues, including Indigenous Peoples and the Arctic States. And we all thought it was a good idea.
The one stipulation that we put in place was that if we do sit down with the States and other Indigenous Peoples, then we need to have an equal voice at the table, because this is our homeland. We're from here. We've proven in the courts that we are nations. We are landowners. We have governments. We have lands. We have culture. We have everything that constitutes nationhood. So that discussion went on for a while.
The States basically came back and said, well, you know what, we don't want to get into a situation where we're all voting. We can't we can't really go there. In other words, they wanted us to design something different. So we talked about it and we said, okay, how about if we design it so that it's based on consensus? Because that's the way we [Indigenous Peoples] make decisions. We discuss an issue, and we wait until everyone is in agreement, and then we make a decision. And the strength behind that is that we have all agreed that this is the best way forward. And there may be compromises or give and take, but we agree to do this together... And it was a huge thing because there is no other international body designed like that, including Indigenous and non-Indigenous Peoples.
Rosa-Máren Magga, podcast host: Mary Simon was determined that a so-called Arctic Council needed to include the equitable involvement of Indigenous Peoples. She recalled to us that during one of the negotiation meetings to establish the Council, the role of Indigenous Peoples was a difficult topic and nearly reached a breaking point. But Mary Simon was not willing to give in – as the one chairing the negotiations, she was prepared to walk away if Indigenous Peoples did not get a seat at the table. Finally, a Permanent Participant category was negotiated for Indigenous Peoples, where they would sit at the same table as nation states with consultation, but not formal decision-making rights.
The Right Honorable Mary Simon: Having worked so hard for two years, you know, because we had a short timeframe to create the Arctic Council. And having negotiated the role of the Permanent Participants, which was quite challenging. It was one of the more difficult issues that we had to deal with during the discussions or the negotiations for the creation of the Council. And to have had that accepted by the Arctic States was a very important moment in terms of how we have, finally, reached a point where Indigenous Peoples can be equal partners.
I was the lead on the discussions to create the Arctic Council. So, in 1996, when I saw all the ministers sitting around the table and the Indigenous Peoples sitting at the same table as Permanent Participants, and I was sitting beside our minister who was chairing the meeting. It just brought home how important the Arctic Council was.
Chief Bill Erasmus: We have recognition at the table, and we're able to exercise our authority with States. And, it provides an opportunity to be at the table to decide on matters that directly affect us. So it is really quite significant. And it's important that we participate and that the Arctic Council continues into the future.
Rosa-Máren Magga, podcast host: There are six Indigenous Peoples’ Organizations with Permanent Participant status in the Arctic Council. This special category is unique to the Arctic Council, and is often cited as one of the Council’s greatest strengths.
Gunn-Britt Retter of the Saami Council is another household name in the Arctic Council. She’s been involved since the early 2000s through the Arctic Council’s Indigenous Peoples’ Secretariat, and then in her capacity at the Saami Council. She shares a story about a small but significant moment that shows Permanent Participants' real influence in the Council.
Gunn-Britt Retter: Small memories, which I think demonstrates the uniqueness of the Arctic Council and one that I used to tell which sounds like a minor detail. The Arctic Council Rules of Procedure says specifically that our Permanent Participants are not part of consensus as the of the decision making, like it's a consensus among the Arctic States. But in practice, that is not true.
During the Canadian Chairship, we had met in person in Ottawa to negotiate the declaration, and then it was an email exchange afterwards. And somebody proposed a change in the language. And Saami Council was not happy with that proposed change. So we responded by email that we preferred the agreement that we had in Ottawa, and we didn't like the new text. And then the conversation in the email went on and we didn't pay full attention. And the Canadian chair actually reached out to Saami Council in a late evening, 10:30 the Tuesday before the Ministerial meeting and said, it's only Saami Council now holding back the consensus. Can you let us know if you can live with his proposed text, which is a kind of a negotiated text between the one that was and the new proposed? So in his mind and in my mind after that call, we were part of the consensus. Even though it's not the rule on the paper. But that little act of the chair actually demonstrates that we are perceived as having a much stronger status than we have on paper.
The Right Honorable Mary Simon: I think one of the things that was critical in the development of the Arctic Council was to find a way to address environmental issues as well as sustainable development. And how would we find that balance between protection and sustainability of resources that we depend on. The work that the Arctic Council has done over the years, has brought that to the forefront. And the role of Indigenous Peoples has become more relevant, more important in terms of decision making. And, today, especially in the climate that we are involved in, in amongst the Arctic States. It's currency, I think, really critical. And the work that the Arctic Council has done, you know, kind of transcends all those years that that have passed since 1996.
Rosa-Máren Magga, podcast host: The Arctic Council grew from humble beginnings, meeting in small community gyms and churches in the late ‘90s and early 2000s. Discussions often turned into asking the big question – how do we get more attention to Arctic Issues? Gunn-Britt Retter shares how one report changed everything.
Gunn-Britt Retter: And then we got in 2004 the Arctic Climate Impact Assessment, which I think was quite a game changer or a turning point because, the joint assessment led by CAFF and AMAP Working Groups really got the message out. And, a whole lot of attention was turned towards the Arctic and towards the Arctic Council with the rapidly changing climate. And the Arctic Council started to receive a lot of Observer applications from different States and organizations who wanted to be part of the game, where it was cool.
So then we got into a mode where we had to start talking – how do we manage all this attention? But in short, I think the Arctic Climate Impact Assessment was a turning point from how do we get attention to how do we manage the attention to the Arctic?
Rosa-Máren Magga, podcast host: The Arctic Climate Impact Assessment was the first comprehensive assessment of a changing Arctic – and it marked a major milestone for the Arctic Council. It showed the value in bringing together science and Indigenous Knowledge. And it broke through the noise of the daily news cycle, placing climate change at the top of the news and putting the Arctic on the global agenda.
After the Assessment was published, the Arctic Council and its work gained momentum. Now we’ll hear from David Balton of the Belfer Center's Arctic Initiative. He was involved in the Arctic Council over many years, and served as Chair of the Senior Arctic Officials during the U.S.’s Arctic Council Chairmanship from 2015-2017 – another transformative time for the Council.
David Balton: The Arctic Council grew from fairly modest beginnings to rise in importance really significantly. It, I think, first came to people's attention through some of the assessments that produced: the Arctic Climate Impact Assessment, the Arctic Marine Shipping Assessment come to mind. Also during the first sort of the middle period of the Arctic Council's history, it served as the venue for the negotiation of treaties among the eight Arctic States, including on search and rescue, marine oil pollution, then on scientific cooperation.
In 2008, five of the eight Arctic States issued something called the Ilulissat Declaration, where they said, we don't need a comprehensive Arctic treaty comparable to the Antarctic Treaty. And while that may have been true, what that left out is that there are certain topics for which some type of binding arrangements among all the eight Arctic States would be helpful.
So we started with search and rescue. It was widely perceived that each of the eight Arctic States individually did not have the capacity to deal with search and rescue incidents adequately. But maybe by pooling our resources, by doing joint training and exercises, by being able to call on one another in the event of a search and rescue incident, we could become more than the sum of our parts. That was the essence of that agreement. It was kind of a proof of concept, but all eight Arctic States, committed to the negotiation and that we got it done within two years, and it was hailed as a great success.
Rosa-Máren Magga, podcast host: Following the first legally binding agreement on search and rescue in 2011, two more were negotiated under the auspices of the Arctic Council. One on marine oil spill response in 2013 and another on scientific cooperation in 2017.
David Balton: Those agreements had something interesting in common. They were all co-chaired by the United States and Russia, at a time when the United States and Russia were having difficulties with one another. Yet it proved to the world that those two governments could come together and do something not only in their mutual interest, but in the interests of all the peoples of the Arctic. Nevertheless, the fact that the US and Russia could work together then remains a lesson that may even be applicable today. We can find things that we want to do and can do together.
Rosa-Máren Magga, podcast host: When we think of Arctic Council milestones, it’s often the treaties, declarations and famous reports that get mentioned. But it’s not just those big moments making an impact. It’s the everyday work on the ground that impacts people in the Arctic – like extreme events such as wildfires.
Chief Bill Erasmus: Right now, it's really difficult living in the Arctic because, for example, I come from the Yellowknife area in northern Canada, the territory’s larger than Norway, for example, and 80% of the population had to evacuate because of wildfires. So priority right now is emergency management. Priority is coming to terms with what we call climate change, global warming.
Rosa-Máren Magga, podcast host: And those are the types of issues the Arctic Council is uniquely set up to address. Benjamin Strong, Chair of the Arctic Council’s Emergency Prevention Preparedness and Response Working Group shares why circumpolar collaboration is crucial to addressing issues that matter most in the Arctic.
Benjamin Strong: EPPR, the Emergency Prevention, Preparedness and Response Working Group is important because we're the emergency managers of the Arctic. If we've learned nothing in 30 years, we've learned that the Arctic is increasingly becoming busier and things that we've never imagined that would happen in the Arctic. So traditionally, we focus on search and rescue, oil spill response. But Covid-19 hit and we had to worry about public health and public health emergencies, migrations from wildfires. Just recently in Alaska, for the second time, the remnants of a typhoon hit the western shores of Alaska. So communities that have never had to deal with high winds and flooding that you would see in the Caribbean or the tropics or in Asia, hit western Alaska. I'm convinced that the types and the complexities of emergencies, will only increase, and that's why it's important that we keep doing our work.
There's a saying in emergency management, the worst time to be exchanging business cards is right after the disaster has happened...The Arctic Council gives us that opportunity to network and to build trust. And sometimes you have to build trust with people that may not have trusted you for a while, but to have that opportunity to build the trust and to build the networks and to learn the capabilities and to make these relationships.
You know, we've talked for a while about the Arctic Council being a family. That's why it's important. You don't want to be picking up the phone and trying to figure out who's your colleague on the other side of the world when there's oil spilled or when there's a ship sinking. Arctic Council builds those relationships and builds those bridges.
Rosa-Máren Magga, podcast host: In 2022, all official meetings of the Arctic Council were put on pause. Because experts and diplomats were no longer meeting, this effectively put a pause not only on meetings but also much of the work.
In 2023, instead of a traditional Ministerial meeting held in a big venue with hundreds of participants and spectators, a short virtual meeting with all eight Senior Arctic Officials and six Permanent Participant heads of delegation marked the official Chairship transition from Russia to Norway. Norway inherited a Council in an unprecedented situation. Many on the outside had speculated that the Arctic Council was dead. And yet, all Arctic States and Permanent Participants repeatedly emphasized their commitment to and belief in the Arctic Council.
Morten Høglund, Norway’s Chair of the Senior Arctic Officials during this time, tells us how he tackled this challenge.
Morten Høglund: It was a huge challenge what we were facing at that time. So much uncertainty. We could focus on everything that was impossible, but instead, we started looking at what is actually doable.
Rosa-Máren Magga, podcast host: The Norwegian Chairship took a new approach. Instead of hosting official Arctic Council meetings, the Chairship hosted a meeting with just Working Groups shortly after taking on the Chairship, followed by an in-person meeting with all six Permanent Participants in Kirkenes, Norway. The meetings made it possible to continue in-person collaboration when it wasn’t possible on a political level. And it provided an opportunity to discuss the future of the Arctic Council during a time when it was uncertain that the forum would continue. For Morten, that first meeting since the pause - with all six Indigenous Peoples’ organizations in the same room in Kirkenes - left a lasting impression.
Morten Høglund: It gave me optimism and it gave us strength. Because up until that time – we were ambitious, we were optimistic – but there was some kind of uncertainty. Is it possible? Are there, you know, too many obstacles that even with all the best ambitions in the world, it can still not be done? So, getting these people in the room, and all the positive feedback. Not saying that we agreed on everything because that's never been what is the most important. The important thing that we meet, discuss, and we move forward. So I think I will say that was the pivotal moment. And when I knew that, yes, the Arctic Council, it will continue.
Rosa-Máren Magga, podcast host: The meeting was hosted by the Saami Council on the sidelines of a gathering under the UN Convention on Climate Change. That meeting provided a critical opportunity for all six Permanent Participants to attend in person. Gunn-Britt Retter shares how this meeting with the Chairship was a turning point.
Gunn-Britt Retter: Yeah, after that meeting I was saying that this meeting will be significant either because it's the last one ever in the Arctic Council or the first one in the next phase. And, I'm happy to say it was the first one in the in the next phase. And that was unique because there was a strategic pause and there was no political or SAO level or any meetings as such. But Saami Council were able to host a meeting that the Norwegian Chairship wanted to have with the Permanent Participants.
Morten Høglund: If a cooperation like the Arctic Council is not doing anything. And of course, that could be an option. Just put it in the freezer until the time is right and we get back to business. I think that would probably be the end of the Council. Other platforms, other arenas would have overtaken us. The interest is so huge. So we need to be up to speed. We need to discuss the important issues in the Arctic. We need to have an international platform that gives that opportunity to be on top of these issues. So in that sense, it was some urgency having work continue.
Rosa-Máren Magga, podcast host: While meeting at the political level was off the table, Norway made it their ambition from the start of their Chairship to get the critical work of the Working Groups up and running again.
Morten Høglund: But of course, you need a consensus decision by all. By all the States and in consultation with all the Permanent Participants in order to achieve this. So, it's no secret that the times were a little sensitive. Still are sensitive. So there were many discussions ongoing at different levels - at the diplomatic level, but also at the political level. Our ambition as Chair was to try to get this set in motion as fast as we could. I was impatient. I felt and I heard the pressure and the impatience coming from the Working Groups, which I think they had every right to be impatient. But, of course, sometimes things take time. I was very pleased when we were able to get things going and gradually starting to have virtual Working Groups meetings.
It was a game changer because it signaled both internally and externally that we are able to progress. It's not full stop. There is a willingness to let this cooperation continue. So for so many reasons, it was very, very important that we had that breakthrough. I felt the relief and I would say even joy that they could finally start having these meetings again.
Rosa-Máren Magga, podcast host: The resumption of Working Group meetings meant that projects could continue more efficiently, and new projects could be created. And this work wasn’t just continuing at a bare minimum for the sake of keeping the structure. The Norwegian Chairship pursued meaningful cooperation on important issues of concern, including wildfires and youth engagement.
One legacy of this is an established Chairship Youth Committee – a group of youth representatives from Permanent Participants and Arctic youth groups. The Chairship Youth Committee advises the Chairship on matters relating to youth, and plans the Arctic Youth Conference – first established under Norway’s Chairship and now continuing during the current Kingdom of Denmark Chairship. Taylor Jobin is a member of the Chairship Youth Committee under the Kingdom of Denmark.
Taylor Jobin: I think the Arctic, to me, is a place of connection and collaboration. It's also a place of relationship. I've been able to meet a lot of really cool people and learn a lot, and I've developed some really great relationships and built some really strong networks. I think to me it really represents a place of growth personally and relationship wise, but also a place where people are able to come together and feel really supported.
I think youth – we can get a bit focused on the negatives. It can be a bit nerve wracking. It's a huge world. But also we're very positive. And we do, I think, a better job at building cross-border relationships and seeing the opportunities that can come from having those tough conversations and talking about the things that nobody really wants to talk about.
I've noticed being in especially Arctic spaces and conferences, that youth are always the ones who point out the things that nobody really wants to talk about. And they always are ready to question people.
And we also really want to be decision makers. We really want to be a part of the system that is making change and deciding our lives now. And because it is going to be our future that we inherit, that we're going to have to at some point step into those roles. So I think youth playing a larger role now only sets us up for better success in the future.
Rosa-Máren Magga, podcast host: Placing a special focus on youth engagement and wildfires – common concerns shared by everyone in the Arctic – helped move the Arctic Council forward in a meaningful way.
Morten Høglund: So, everybody kind of pulled together to see what could we do also to advance on important issues. What could we do to raise the flag of the Arctic Council? But not because the Council in itself is important, but because the cooperation is important. The dialog is important. The participants, the platform for Indigenous representatives is important because it's so unique. And I'm proud that were able to do these things in parallel. And we were not paralyzed by inaction, and only in the survival mode.
Rosa-Máren Magga, podcast host: Benjamin Strong shares what the experience has been like to work through geopolitical tensions from a Working Group perspective.
Benjamin Strong: I'm a firm, firm believer that nobody in the Arctic wakes up and says, how can I make it worse. I mean, it matters why we had to pause. But what matters, what's equally as important is the emergency management of saving lives, saving the environment, preventing a catastrophe from happening in the Arctic.
You know, if a ship sinks in the Arctic, I don't care the politics or the the particular national interest. I just care that somebody is there to save me. That transcends kind of all of this. So despite the any particular national interest or a Permanent Participant interest, we're there to work together.
Our work is important because while the Arctic may change, the ice may melt. It's not going away, and there's just greater access to it. We have important work to do, and it will continue on well beyond, into the next 30 years.
Working with the Arctic Council has been the absolute luckiest job of my life. It's amazing work. I don't have one single proudest moment. I would say as Chair of EPPR, I'm working in a very politically charged environment. There's a lot of noise. There's a lot going on in the world, while the work that we do is very, very serious. We're still able to maintain very professional friendly - I'll go back to the same word - family relationships.
There was an incident of a cruise ship grounding in Greenland. I could pick up the phone call my Danish counterpart and have direct connection to find out. Do we need to implement the search and rescue agreement? Do we need to implement, the oil spill agreement? When there was an earthquake in the Russian Federation, I can contact the head of delegation from the Russian Federation. We hope that your citizens are safe. We hope that your responders are safe. If there's anything you need, we'll be there for you. When the remnants of Typhoon Halong hit western Alaska, Russian colleagues reached out to me. How can we help? How can we learn from this? We can transcend the geopolitics and having that family relationship is probably, where I am now as Chair, one of the things that I'm most proud of. Continuing to maintain that professional cooperation.
Rosa-Máren Magga, podcast host: It’s no secret that as the Arctic Council approached it’s third decade, the changing geopolitical landscape caused significant challenges for the Arctic Council. Yet, it has endured in this new reality. And part of the reason is embedded in the structure of the Council. The consensus decision making mechanism made it so no State or Permanent Participant could make a decision without the others. Everyone agrees to continue. The Council was also designed so that not every Arctic State had to take part in every project. They can pick and choose the projects they want to support depending on their interests. If a project is not in the interest of a state, they can simply choose not to take part.
Jennifer Spence of the Harvard Arctic Initiative is the former Executive Secretary of the Arctic Council’s Sustainable Development Working Group. With experience in Arctic affairs both inside and outside of the Arctic Council, Jennifer reflects on how the Arctic Council fits into a new geopolitical reality.
Jennifer Spence: The idea that work can still progress despite tensions or differences in approach or priorities by Arctic States, non Arctic States, sort of the growing interest from different parties in the Arctic, really does again reflect the strength of the Arctic Council to convene those that are interested in a particular project.
So, because of the consensus based approach, and because of the ability for a group of individual States to come together along with Permanent Participants and engage in a project without necessarily it being all of the States together, all of the Permanent Participants. It offers a huge amount of flexibility for those that have common interests to come together and recognize those interests and to mobilize around them. And that flexibility in this context is even more important.
Rosa-Máren Magga, podcast host: One important aspect built into the DNA of the Arctic Council is that it explicitly excludes any discussion of military security. And in many ways, the exclusion of hard security has been important for its success during geopolitical uncertainty. But while Arctic narratives have a renewed focus on military matters, the Arctic Council does address Arctic security in other ways. And it’s an important conversation to have, according to Taylor Jobin of the Chairship Youth Committee.
Taylor Jobin: I really like talking about like what security is to me, because hard security is always immediately what you think of when you talk about Arctic security.
But it's also something that I've heard a lot of people say is that you can't have hard security if you don't have healthy people. So if you're not investing in our health care systems, health security, food security, and within the wellness area, then you can't have a secure region. They are intrinsically linked, but most of the focus is on military - building bases, building new airports, investing a lot of money into that. But I think to me, it really means building up a healthy community. And that is so many different parts.
Rosa-Máren Magga, podcast host: As with many other aspects, narratives about the Arctic are also changing. Once called a region of exceptionalism – where cooperation in the Arctic could be sheltered from geopolitics elsewhere – many have now declared Arctic exceptionalism as over. The Arctic Council is closely tied with these discussions.
Jennifer Spence: I think Arctic exceptionalism – it's become this fascinating debate right now. It either is or it isn't. And I kind of have two answers to this and one is – to say that Arctic exceptionalism is dead is to miss some of the really amazing parts of the Arctic, in the sense that when we talk about it, we're often referring to the geopolitical situation. We're talking about the consensus and the cooperation between States. But what's been quite powerful about the Arctic Council is, in fact, the cooperation with First Nations, Indigenous, Inuit, Sámi - like the fact that this innovation has come to be a signature element of it, is also exceptional. The environment of the Arctic is also exceptional.
So when we take a narrow lens to what it means to be exceptional is to miss some of the really important features of the of what makes it exceptional. I also think one of the risks of the idea of exceptionalism, is that if the narrative doesn't align with reality of where we are right now, then it doesn't serve the same purpose anymore. So we need to reflect on how we communicate with the outside world about the Arctic. And this is where we need to begin to reflect on if the narrative of exceptionalism isn't serving a useful purpose for informing policy anymore, then we need to consider what that that looks like.
I think we need to celebrate that the Arctic Council is evolving. I feel like there's been this sort of tension between this need to justify that the Arctic Council has survived. Like, I think we've moved beyond the ‘is the Arctic Council dead’ scenario. I think that it's only a very poorly informed person who isn't aware that the Arctic Council is doing work. But I do think there's still more work to be done to acknowledge that it isn't just keeping the lights on, that there's really good, important work being done. And I hope that these types of initiatives will give people a better understanding of what's happening within the Arctic Council.
Rosa-Máren Magga, podcast host: We asked our guests what the Arctic Council means to them, and their hopes for its future. We start with Benjamin Strong.
Benjamin Strong: You're gonna make me cry. I'm sorry. Being able to work on this portfolio and travel to some of the most amazing places in the world and know that the work is really hard, and it's never been harder. We've talked about geopolitics and geopolitics now coming from all sides of the world. It's a really challenging time. I've never been more inspired by the people that I work with. I've never been more inspired by the commitment at our level, at the Working Group level, to ensure that the Arctic is safe. And this is a privilege. My hope for the Arctic Council is, first, that it continues on. Then, there's a lot of talk about Arctic youth. I hope that we can continue to inspire young people.
Rosa-Máren Magga, podcast host: Chief Bill of Arctic Athabaskan Council also thinks of youth.
Chief Bill Erasmus: in terms of young people feeling like they, they have a future, I think we need to really focus on that more. If I was a young person today, I'd be worried. And so what can we do as an Arctic Council to give young people, not so much hope, but, make them feel good about themselves and where everyone is going. We an obligation to do that so that the next generation is comfortable and the next generation is going to thrive rather than live in fear or live in a insecure environment.
Rosa-Máren Magga, podcast host: Taylor Jobin of the Chairship Youth Committee has a positive outlook, despite challenges and uncertainty.
Taylor Jobin: When I think about the future of the Arctic, I think there's a lot of emotions that come to mind, because it can be a bit nerve wracking as a youth to think about where we are now and what that could mean for the future.
I think there's a lot of things changing environmentally, geopolitically. Things are very uncertain, and that can be a bit nerve wracking knowing that there's a long way to go in our life, and the kind of decisions that we're going to have to make. I sometimes I feel anxious about it, and sometimes when I talk to my friends, you get so focused on the negatives and the issues that we see. But then I also feel really positive, because I think that there's also a lot of opportunity for change. In conflict also comes opportunities for growth and for partnership and to realize that we can make different decisions for a better future. And I think youth are really able to lead that discussion.
Rosa-Máren Magga, podcast host: Gunn-Britt Retter of the Saami Council describes what the Arctic Council means to her personally.
Gunn-Britt Retter: Definitely it means friendship. There are people in the Arctic Council family that I have learned to know like 25 years ago, and we still meet here. So it's long term friendship. It's an opportunity to understand my own culture from different perspectives as I visit other places and learn other people, to learn to know other people who also reflect upon your own culture.
Meeting with other Indigenous Peoples in fora like Arctic Council also has given me terminology to address the unspoken in Sámi culture. Because we don't always, are trained to speak about spirits or traditional knowledge, or it's a hidden or ignored knowledge and so on. So I have learned a lot of terminology on how to address core issues in Sámi culture.
And also I have learned, or maybe that was by nature, to be diplomatic. To speak with the State representatives, to convey our messages to people who are very different than us, and come from different cultures.
Rosa-Máren Magga, podcast host: The strong people-to-people and cultural link that the Arctic Council provides as described by Gunn-Britt would perhaps make Mary Simon, the mother of the Arctic Council, proud.
Despite everything that has changed over 30 years, The Right Honorable Mary Simon views the Arctic Council she helped create as a forum that is still critical.
The Right Honorable Mary Simon: When we first started discussing it amongst the eight Arctic nations, we felt that it would be an organization that would foresee the future of what was happening in the Arctic. So the relevancy of the Arctic Council has not diminished. It has changed. There's no doubt.
The world is changing quite rapidly, so it's hard to envisage what the future might look like. I think it's one of the very critical organizations for the Arctic region. I, as an individual, have learned a lot by being involved in the Arctic Council. And I feel privileged to have done that.
Rosa-Máren Magga, podcast host: Morten Høglund and David Balton, both former Senior Arctic Official Chairs in the Arctic Council, believe in the strength and value of the Arctic Council through its hardships.
Morten Høglund: Under the Arctic Council umbrella, we provide knowledge which is of global importance, which feeds into the global knowledge on what's happening in the Arctic. The Arctic countries have always, especially in the past three decades, been at the forefront of leading this discussion. And that's the way it should be.
David Balton: The Arctic Council still is important now, despite or perhaps even because of growing tensions in the geopolitical sphere. Ten years ago, when I was Chair of the Senior Arctic Officials, there were also tensions. And yet, at that time, the Arctic States and the Permanent Participants chose to set aside those differences and focus on the common problems that they had in the Arctic and continue to cooperate. Compared to ten years ago, those tensions have increased, and yet the Arctic Council is still producing worthwhile products for people of the Arctic. And we need that. We really need the Arctic Council to continue to work. There are no other fora focused on circumpolar issues that have the reach and the history that the Arctic Council does.
Jessica Cook, podcast host: It was such a privilege to speak with all the guests we had today. They’re so passionate about the Arctic Council – and I think that’s what makes this forum work through thick and thin. People really, genuinely care about the cooperation.
Rosa-Máren Magga, podcast host: Yes, I fully agree. It’s so meaningful to hear and learn from people who have been part of making the Arctic Council what it is today and hear their insights on these various processes.
Jessica Cook, podcast host: Rosa-Máren, you’ve been with the Indigenous Peoples’ Secretariat during these recent turbulent times. What would you say you’ve learned from that?
Rosa-Máren Magga, podcast host: Although I’ve been part of the Arctic Council ecosystem for years, I still learn new things every day. For me the guiding principle has all the time been that although the times have changed and the world is changing, the core of the Arctic Council still remains the same.
Secondly, as many of the people in this episode already said, the cooperation is based on trust and good working relations. Meeting people face to face is crucial to build and maintain those good relations and commitment. And I’ve truly seen and experienced that in my work.
Jessica Cook, podcast host: I agree. I remember some months back, watching a panel about the Arctic Council’s 30th anniversary, where many of our podcast guests spoke. It’s still challenging times, there are a lot of sensitivities, so you never know how these things will go. But there was so much joy on that panel (and in the room!) – there was productive conversation. You could feel the chemistry. And there was so much laughter between the more serious discussions. It was the epitome of the Arctic Council.
I think 30 years from now, people will look back on this period as another defining moment in the Council's evolution.
Rosa-Máren Magga, podcast host: Maybe we are in the middle of building something special here, which we will only realize in the future when we mark the next anniversary.
Thanks for listening to This Way Up from the Arctic Council Secretariat and Indigenous Peoples Secretariat. This episode was hosted by Jessica Cook and Rosa-Máren Magga. It was produced and written by Jessica Cook and Rosa-Máren Magga with editing by Anja Salo, Minetta Westerlund and Linda Lyberth Kristiansen. The music in this episode is by Emil Kárlsen, used with permission. Sound design by Både Og studios.
Thanks so much to our guests:
The Right Honorable Mary Simon, former Governor General of Canada
Chief Bill Erasmus of Arctic Athabaskan Council
Gunn-Britt Retter of the Saami Council
David Balton of the Harvard Kennedy School’s Belfer Center
Benjamin Strong of the Emergency Prevention, Preparedness and Response Working Group
Morten Høglund, former Chair of the Senior Arctic Officials for Norway
Taylor Jobin of the Kingdom of Denmark Chairship Youth Committee
And Jennifer Spence of the Harvard Kennedy School's Belfer Center
The views expressed in this episode do not reflect those of the Arctic States and Permanent Participants.