| Summary: | This thesis assesses the potential success of the United States’ newly assumed role as chairman of the Arctic Council in light of its own record of development in Alaska, its only Arctic territory. Using primary and secondary qualitative research, perspectives from multiple stakeholders are analyzed to assess the United States’ current capabilities in the Arctic versus its rhetoric and responsibilities. To gauge this more effectively, the theory of problem-solving capacity is used to analyze the United States’ potential capacity in the Arctic Council, while the theory of environmental security is used to analyze the United States’ level of investment and commitment to Alaska. With development in Alaska minimal at best and local communities at risk from environmental impacts, the ideal tool for addressing these deficiencies is identified to be icebreakers operated by the United States Coast Guard. Impediments to acquiring sufficient icebreaking capacity are explored, with the conclusion that if the United States is to take effective action on the Arctic stage, investment in icebreakers and therefore the environment and inhabitants of the Arctic is necessary. Not doing so reveals the USA’s agenda to be empty rhetoric and consequently this lost opportunity for leadership may lead to catastrophic results for the region.
|
|---|