China wants a piece of the Arctic Ocean

[lsquare]

http://www.torontosun.com/news/g20/2010/06/22/14484401.html

I can't believe what I'm reading here. Here's a country with no Arctic coast line, but an official thinks that because China have 1/5 of the world's population, it deserves a stake in its resources.

 

[MotF Bane]

Absolutely not. Their population is irrelevant, no coastline, no exploitation.

 

[Jaskalas]

Guess they could always buy it.....

 

[dahunan]

Guess they could always buy it.....

True.. or say.. trade it for some of the debt we owe them

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/mar/02/chinas-debt-to-us-treasury-more-than-indicated/
After peaking at $801.5 billion, China's holdings of U.S. Treasury securities declined to $755.4 billion at the year's end, dropping the communist power into the position of second-largest holder of Treasury debt after Japan's $768.8 billion, official government data reveal.
But these numbers don't tell the whole story.
"The U.S. Treasury data almost certainly understate Chinese holdings of our government debt because [the U.S. figures] do not reveal the ultimate country of ownership when [debt] instruments are held through an intermediary in another jurisdiction," Simon Johnson, an economics professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, told the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission, a bipartisan forum established by Congress in 2000 to monitor the security implications of the U.S. economic relationship with China.
Mr. Johnson told the commission last week that "a great deal" of last year's $170 billion increase in Treasury holdings by the United Kingdom "may be due to China placing offshore dollars in London-based banks" and then using the funds to purchase Treasury debt.

 

[ZzZGuy]

From what I've read in that it's one official voicing his opinion and China is making plans to make use of arctic waters in the future due to milting ice making it viable. I'm sure I can find plenty of nutty comment from most any government that was a opinion of one person.

"One" ice breaker does not mean they want to seize control of the arctic. That may change, but currently I don't see a problem with China. Should we ignore them? No, but don't grab the pitch fork and torch just yet.

Canada on the other hand needs to get it's ass in gear with the arctic. Patrol the waterways like it's actually part of Canada and further exploit the resources north.

 

[Schadenfroh]

Give it all to Russia, they are the only ones that will actually drill.

 

[Jhhnn]

The original article works hard to be sensationalistic, and fails.

Much of the arctic lies in international waters, which are fair game for anybody to exploit, the same as the rest of the ocean. I think the reference to 1/5 of the world's population is more along the lines that China owes it to herself and her people to pursue resource development wherever they can... and is mindful of the fact that most other resources are already claimed by somebody else...

Eventually, the ban on development in the antarctic will be abandoned, as well...

 

[Lemon law]

The arctic coast mainly belongs to Russia, and Russia only seems to be exploiting the portion due North of Moscow, even though their Arctic coast extend up to five time zones east of that. Chinese nationals are already moving in to almost unpopulated Russian zones to exploit Russian national resources on land, and the next step is logically to exploit the resources that they lie off shore, especially beyond the 12 mile limits.

But somewhat thankfully that is a Russian Chinese dispute, and the USA can stay out of the conflict.

As it is, Russia can stay busy exploiting their North of Moscow resources for the foreseeable future, if they can cut a deal where they get Royalties from Chinese labor, it could be a win win for both.