Alaska Insight is supported in part by the Corporation for Public Broadcasting and by viewers just like you.

Thank you.

The White House's new ten year national strategy for the Arctic region reflects a growing interest by the federal government in the effects of climate change on Alaska and the challenges it brings for the security and economic well-being of Arctic residents.

It's a very cool, very, very awesome to see people from the White House here, to really learn and learn about Alaska and learn about our very unique problems we face here.

We'll break down the new strategy with experts who helped craft the plan.

Right now on Alaska Insight.

Good evening.

The Arctic is the Earth's thermostat and what happens in this vast remote region affects temperature, wind and ocean currents all across the planet.

It is also home for people who have thrived there for generations as vessel traffic increases and other nations eye the resources in the Arctic.

What is the best course for international peace cooperation and for the well-being of the future generations?

Who will live there?

We'll discuss the ten year plan released by the White House.

But before we get to that discussion, we'll start off with some of the top stories of the week from Alaska Public Media's collaborative statewide news network.

Alaska's two U.S. senators voted this week in favor of ending debate on a bill to protect same sex and interracial marriage rights.

Advance ing the bill toward final passage.

The Alaska Beacon reports Senators Lisa Murkowski and Dan Sullivan joined ten other Republicans and all 50 Democrats on a vote needed to end debate.

Final passage is likely if the bill becomes law and the Supreme Court reverses its 2015 decision that guaranteed same sex marriage rights, states would be allowed to choose whether to ban same sex marriage.

The law would, however, require states to recognize same sex marriage from other states.

In Alaska, the state constitution still contains an amendment prohibiting same sex marriage.

That amendment has been legally suspended since 2014, but could be reactivated if the Supreme Court reverses itself.

Residents of western Alaska now have two extra weeks to apply for state and federal disaster assistance, as recovery efforts from ex typhoon Murdoch are ongoing in various communities.

The Federal Emergency Management Agency, or FEMA, announced last week that it's extending the application deadline for disaster assistance to December sixth.

This is the second time the disaster assistance deadline has been extended since a federal disaster was first declared on September 23rd.

Anchorage School District administrators are no longer recommending eliminating language immersion programs as part of a plan to balance its budget.

School board announced the decision to a crowded board room earlier this week.

More than 100 people had signed up to speak at the school board meeting, many in opposition to cutting language immersion.

The district offers a range of language immersion programs, including Spanish, Chinese, Russian, French.

And you pick.

The school board is still considering a range of recommended cuts, including closing six schools as it faces a $68 million budget deficit next year.

You can find the full versions of these stories and many more on our Web site, Alaska Public Org.

Or by downloading the Alaska Public Media app on your phone.

Now on to our discussion for this evening on the future of the Arctic, its residents and resources.

The federal government has a history of taking a one size fits all approach to issues in Alaska, applying solutions developed in the lower 48 to problems that are uniquely Alaskan.

But that's starting to change.

Later in the show, we'll look at how the National Strategy for the Arctic region was developed with Alaska in mind.

And as Alaska Public Media's Madeleine Rose reports, White House officials are starting to look directly at the ways climate change affects the state and its people.

This is a step bison horn come.

Out of the wall.

That's a mammoth bone.

The permafrost beneath Fairbanks and much of northern Alaska is incredibly old.

But as temperatures climb in the Arctic, it's beginning to thaw faster, bringing with it engineering challenges and increased erosion.

That's why Dr. Alondra Nelson from the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy went to the Fairbanks permafrost tunnels in October to learn more.

I'm part of the conversation today was about.

The vulnerable.

Communities and how that constellation of forces, both quickly and more slowly, are affecting communities all over Alaska, particularly Alaska Native communities.

Robby Strunk, with the Cold Climate Housing Research Center in Fairbanks, has seen firsthand the impacts of climate change and thawing permafrost and is home village of Quinn Huck.

With each strong storm, the ocean is eating up, swelling up the coastline, getting like just making its way inland.

He's also seen what happens when an outside group tries to fix an issue without getting local input, like when federal agencies built dozens of houses in the seventies that weren't meant for the village's conditions.

Some of the problems you're seeing in those houses are rotting walls, the insulation falling to the bottom of the wall after it got wet and froze in the winter and then melted in the summer.

But things are starting to change.

White House officials like Dr. Nelson are making their way to the state to hear directly from Alaskans about the issues they face and the solutions they're working on.

We are really thinking about Alaska as a really important site for unfortunately rapid climate change that's happening in our country and.

In the world.

Both as a source of, you know, of degradation and of rapid change, but of a source of innovation as well.

Dr. Nelson and other officials visited sites across Alaska like the Fairbanks permafrost tunnels, to see the challenges Alaska faces and housing, engineering, energy efficiency and the impacts of climate change.

Permafrost acts as a crossroads for these issues.

Its thawing leads to more than just erosion.

The grass is yeah, I think it's about 22,000 years old.

We've had it dated grass and other vegetation like that, frozen and permafrost gets decomposed as it thaws, which in turn releases more greenhouse gases into the atmosphere.

Just how much it would add if all the permafrost thawed is still up in the air or frozen in the ground.

But seeing the tunnels and the changes they've undergone over the years gives Dr. Nelson a new sense of urgency.

I mean, I think the Arctic.

You know, and, you know, places like the permafrost tunnel that give us a real view into how quickly climate change is happening.

And it also gives us a view into what we can do about it as a society.

And as a society.

Officials like Dr. Nelson and Dr. Larry Hinzman of the Interagency Arctic Research Policy Committee are recognizing the solutions need to come from multiple levels.

Some of these problems are really do take a concerted effort from the national side, but also we have to involve the state of Alaska.

We have to involve local communities in resolving many of these challenges.

And while the issues may be daunting, seeing the national interest in the work, he does give Strunk a new sense of hope.

It's a very cool, very, very awesome to see people from the White House here to really learn and learn about Alaska and learn about our very unique problems we face here.

I'm very excited to continue on this process in getting a clean, clean, safe future.

A sense of hope and a seat at the table for Alaska Public Media.

I'm Madeline Rose.

While 22,000 year old grass really sticks with me.

Joining me tonight to discuss both the national strategy for the Arctic Region document and ideas for how to best protect the Arctic for the future is Ambassador David Bolton.

Ambassador Bolton is the Executive Director of the Arctic Executive Steering Committee.

And in the studio with us this evening is Liz Clarke Cravalho.

Liz is a commissioner for the U.S. Arctic Research Committee or Commission.

Thank you both for being here this evening.

It's so great to have have you both on hand.

So, Ambassador Bolton, I want to start with you.

Last September, a little more than a year ago, the Biden administration announced it was reactivating the Arctic Executive Steering Committee and made you executive director.

Explain why the committee needed to be reactive, dated and what are you working on?

Thanks very much.

The committee needed to be reactivated because so much was going on in the Arctic and all of the different federal agencies that work in the Arctic needed to be better coordinated.

That's really the mission of this steering committee to try to advance U.S. policy in the Arctic, including in the U.S., Arctic and Alaska in a coordinated way.

And give us a brief overview of the ten year strategy.

It's not long.

We've got it right here, 15 pages.

It has four main pillars and five guiding principles.

Describe what the White House is aiming for with this document.

This is the first time in almost a decade that our nation has come together to produce a strategy for the Arctic region.

And a lot had changed in the intervening period, as your segment earlier made clear.

Climate change has accelerated in the Arctic and has reached a very serious set consequences for the people who actually live in the Arctic and is threatening even greater consequences for the planet as a whole.

And the geopolitical circumstances of the Arctic are also changing.

That was true even before Russia invaded Ukraine in a full scale land in February and certainly since then.

So the new strategy is an attempt to grapple with current circumstances and to chart a course for the next ten years for our government to follow.

All right.

Thank you for starting us off there, Liz.

How do you see your work as a commissioner with the Arctic Research Commission connecting with this national strategy?

Is it sort of a guiding document that will help the Council prioritize future research, or is your work more separate?

And you might turn to this at times, but you're on a separate path.

Those are all great questions.

Thank you, Larry.

The commission actually was consulted in the development of the national strategy on the Arctic region.

There were some good conversations, as I understand it, that happened between our chair, Mike Fraga, our executive director, John Farrell.

And as commissioners, we had the opportunity just to provide our overall thoughts and input.

Something I appreciate was the outreach early on in the process that happened by the administrative team to do consultation with tribes as well.

On the topic of the National Strategy on the Arctic region.

I really see the work of the Commission as really centered on our role, which is to provide advice and guidance to the President and Congress on Arctic Research.

And these two documents have a lot of synergy because of the common themes and issues that impact the work of the Commission and what the nation is aiming for.

And so I see our ability to do that, provide input as really important, but also to utilize these pillars to think about how really what we can do in research to address these challenges the nation is facing.

Liz You also represent one of the Arctic stakeholders in your work with Nana.

How do your roles sort of overlap and how important is that connection?

So my role at Nana is I serve as the vice president of Lands.

A lot of my work is focused on working with communities on things like providing land for community use, addressing challenges related to subsistence, but also looking at how we as an organization can positively impact our shareholders and have sustainable economic development in the region.

Research the way I see some the synergy between that work and the Commission is really that there is a lot of knowledge on the ground about the impacts of climate change on our region and our communities.

The need to adapt, we see it locally.

It's very important and research has an important role to play in the development of public policy.

So through the work of the Commission, I'm trying to bring in my knowledge and experience to provide recommendations, but also learn and then bring information back to the broader community in Alaska through my seat, which is an industry seat.

So I think there's a lot of synergy there, and I really appreciate my fellow commissioners who are on the commission.

Yeah, it seems like a really important connection to be in both roles.

Ambassador Bolton, the White House announced plans to attempt to appoint an ambassador at large for the Arctic region earlier this year.

What can you tell us about what the idea is for this position?

And and are there people under consideration?

Laura The idea is not entirely new.

And Senator Murkowski and others have been calling for the State Department to appoint an Arctic ambassador or a similar position for some time.

There have been people who have served in a capacity at the State Department like that in the past, but none with that exact title.

And this summer is the first time.

Yes, the State Department announced that it would appoint an ambassador at large for Arctic affairs.

I believe the vetting process is still underway.

The person, whomever is nominated would require Senate confirmation before he or she could take that post.

I think the is the person once in place can pursue the highest level diplomacy we have in the Arctic and reach out to other Arctic nations, other nations interests in the Arctic and advance U.S. policy through personal diplomacy.

Where is the process with that?

Is it just an idea at this point?

No, it's a it's more than simply an idea or there is a commitment to nominate such a person.

But it's my understanding that a number of people are under consideration.

And I think before long we will hear an announcement by the president that he has nominated somebody for the position, and then it would be up to the Senate to consider a confirmation.

So, Liz, as an Inupiat person from an Arctic community, what are your thoughts about an Arctic ambassador position?

And do you have ideas for who you'd like to see in such a role?

Oh, my goodness.

That's a great question.

I'm excited.

I think when we heard the news come out that this position was being put forward, this is something I think that has been broadly supported and can really benefit a lot of what needs to happen in the international scale.

I think sometimes we lose sight of the fact that the majority of our indigenous people in Alaska are pan Arctic or across many borders.

We're not just limited to Alaska.

And so I'm excited about the idea that there will be a broader coordinated approach to Arctic diplomacy.

Many of the issues impacting our communities are not unique just to Alaska.

Our systems are unique, but there's an opportunity.

I think, to collaborate cross-border.

And I think you see that the theme in the National Strategy on the Arctic region, I think I'll withhold my comments on who I'd like to see.

I'm excited to see the announcement when it does come out and hopefully the process will move forward swiftly.

I think this person is going to be challenged to continue the good legacy of Arctic international collaboration and cooperation with the challenges that we're currently seeing and some of the some of the conflict that we're seeing in the Arctic.

Would you like to see at least someone from the Arctic region be that Ambassador?

Absolutely.

Thank you for that.

I think it would be wonderful if this person was from the Arctic region.

It'd be great to see an indigenous person in this role.

However, I think we'll we'll see what comes out of this process.

All right.

Thank you.

As we're talking about this national strategy for the Arctic region in the background, the CAP 27 meetings have been going on.

Today is the last day.

I understand it.

Ambassador, the Washington Post reported that negotiations haven't been going well, that there is a lot of tension between richer nations and poorer nations about who should pay the the bill for climate disasters.

And it seems like the documents that are coming forward have a lot of placeholder statements rather than actual action and some climate activists are saying it's like rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic rather than turning the ship.

What are your thoughts about what's happening there and will there be some kind of create action going forward?

My understanding is that the negotiations are going into overtime to the sports metaphor that the diplomats are still working to try to resolve remaining issues.

Yes.

Put your finger on, I think, what is the key and source of a UN resolution as point, namely a claims for compensation of loss from climate change that the poorer countries are requesting of the richer countries.

My own feeling is that there probably will be some sort of resolution of that matter.

But the bigger question that you're asking is what are we doing as a nation and the world to try to combat climate change in the first place?

I think it's fair to say that at least in this administration there, we have embraced the crisis.

We have come to see it as an existential threat.

President Biden has called that as much.

And through legislation that Congress has passed recently, we actually now have some new funding to try to move our way from fossil fuels and toward a cleaner economy moving forward.

That's my source of hope.

All right.

It seems like there's a lot more to be done as part of the reporting referenced, the fact that China has been mining more coal and we're seeing more fossil fuel development in some countries because of the problems with Russia.

How does that all shake out?

Do you think?

The circumstances we currently face are both difficult, but I also think they are anomalous.

The war in Ukraine has required a scramble to find other sources of energy that had been provided by Russia.

Europe in particular, is scrambling to do that now, but over the long term, I think the war is teaching us that we really do need to wean ourselves off fossil fuels more quickly and have a more dependable and greener energy mix available to us.

Ambassador, the four pillars of the National Strategy.

The first one is security.

Was it always the first one or did it move up in priority because of Russia's aggression?

Certainly the security situation has changed because of Russia's aggression.

And so some of the language that you see in the that pillar of our strategy is different from the way it was written before February initially.

Security is, however, an ongoing interest of the United States in the Arctic, and that is true even in the last strategy and the strategy before that.

We want to try to keep the Arctic peaceful, stable and cooperative, also prosperous.

I should say that the Arctic still is, in my estimation, a low threat region in the world.

I don't actually think the risk of armed conflict in the Arctic is very significant.

However, there are tensions in the Arctic, a spring from Ukraine and the inability to work with Russia now in the Arctic.

And I do worry that the threat of unintended consequence, an unintended conflicts in the Arctic, has actually increased.

Mm.

Liz.

When the Arctic Research Commission is considering areas of research, is military buildup or the prospect of it part of what you're recommending needs to be studied?

We know that Russia has been building up along the coast.

Militarily, what what are you thinking about at the commission level?

About these things?

Well, I think the similar to the national strategy on the Arctic region are real important.

Part of what you may see in our goals and objective reports previously, as well as the one that will be coming out in early 2023, is this focus on research and collaboration in the Arctic or our collaboration on research in the Arctic?

And I think a real critical part of what we talk about security, when there's peace and stability there is the ability to advance research that is pan Arctic cross-border.

And I think that's really critical to understanding what kind of impacts are happening in the climate to different communities.

Russia does represent the largest landmass in the Arctic.

So if we're trying to understand permafrost thaw what that means, we want to really encourage collaboration and cooperation.

So when I think about the Commission's views on security, I think predominantly it's a conversation about how are we going to continue to advance these issues around research in the face of this kind of conflict?

I think certainly the question around what what does the geopolitics of the region is in an area of study that's important, but also economics.

What does this mean for the economy of the Arctic?

What does this mean as we talk about moving towards green energy, especially in the face of so many parts of the Alaskan Arctic, which don't have very low cost energy?

Right.

So what does this really look like?

In addition, how does research support adapting infrastructure that could be developed through security and support appropriate levels of defense and homeland security presence in Alaska and in the Arctic region?

We've been talking a lot about national and international work and cooperation, but what do you think the state should focus on in the future for the northern part of this of Alaska, that is the Arctic region.

Well, something I really appreciate is that the state of Alaska is very involved with the U.S. Arctic Research Commission, and we do get input from the state and our regular basis and share their views.

I know we've had Commissioner Doug Burns and Lang participate providing input on anything related to wildlife management in the region.

I think this state is also recognized that there are challenges related to infrastructure that need to be addressed, and one is support, research, collaboration and cooperation.

And so from my point of view, for the state of Alaska, I think continuing down that path of encouraging collaboration and cooperation is really critical.

How are we going to take that research and implement it to support community adaptation?

We have communities that are, of course, dealing with coastal erosion, but also in river systems dealing with challenges with subsistence.

So I think the state is appropriately at the table talking about these issues and thinking about how we can take research and use it across all of these areas to address hazards.

The infrastructure like I talked about and the human health and wellbeing concerns.

Mm hmm.

A lot to consider in our final couple of minutes here.

Ambassador.

What?

This is a document that's at a high level.

It doesn't have a tremendous amount of detail.

It's sort of setting the guideposts, what what you want to see in the next five years as the top three priorities for the Arctic.

Oh, I'm not sure I could bring down to three, because there are many different things in the national strategy that we have committed to.

We need now to figure out the next steps for each of those things.

What are the timelines, what are the resources we will need to bring to bear?

Who are our partners in doing the things that we've now committed to do?

And one of those partners, as those which are saying, is the state of Alaska itself, there are any number of things that need doing in the Arctic region of Alaska, where the central government and the state government should be able to work together.

And I'm looking forward to reach out to the leadership at the State, especially now that the elections are passed, and talking about how we can work together to do the things that are required.

And how about for you, Liz?

What what are the emerging what do you see as urgent for the next few years here?

Absolutely.

I think some of the themes that you'll see just from a commission perspective very briefly, are going to be conversations and recommendations about around environmental risks and hazards, human health and wellbeing, infrastructure, the economic of the economics of the Arctic region, encouraging research in that area, and really the need to ensure that we're encouraging research cooperation and collaboration and that's across borders but also with Indigenous populations.

I think me personally as an individual, my perspective is, is that we have a need to see Alaska and the Arctic region adapt to a new economic environment and consider how we pursue infrastructure that really works for communities so that we can adapt to the big challenges that are being faced by our communities.

All right.

Well, thank you so much.

This time goes by far too quickly.

Thank you, Liz.

And Ambassador Bolton, for being here.

Commissioner Cravalho, I should say.

That's it for this edition of Alaska Insight.

Visit our website, Alaska Public dot org for breaking news and reports from our partner stations across the state.

While you're there, sign up for our Free Daily Digest so you won't miss any of Alaska's top stories of the day.

Alaska Insight will be taking a break over the holiday season.

We're back with the first episode in the New Year on Friday, January 13th.

For all of us here at Alaska Public Media, we hope you have a safe and happy holiday season and a great start to the new year.

Thanks for joining us this evening.

I'm Laurie Townsend.

Good night.