Can the Arctic teach the world to cooperate?

Must exploitation and conflict inevitably accompany exploration and expansion? Or can we learn the lessons of the past and reap the benefits of expansion without falling prey to its temptations?

MAKSIM BLINOV/SPUTNIK/AP
PARTICIPANTS OF THE 10TH BIG ARCTIC EXPEDITION TREK ACROSS THE NORTH POLE.

Just maybe, the Arctic could represent a giant do-over.

It is safe to say that the history of world exploration has not always made for comfortable reading. True, the courage of the adventurer has inspired. But the Age of Exploration was not known for its humanity. Among its products were enslavement and exploitation. In more recent years, the negative byproducts of such an expansionist mind-set have been attenuated, yet they still remained the same in essentials: The cold war was defined largely by powerful countries using others for their own benefit.

Apart from these colonial tendencies, though, something different and powerfully positive was also going on. The world was being connected. The capacities of the human race were being pooled. Every corner of the globe was being brought into the collective enterprise of generating wealth. 

Obviously, that process has happened extremely unevenly and often unfairly. Yet it is also true that the world is orders of magnitude healthier and more prosperous than it was centuries ago.

The question now being posed in the Arctic – and by Peter Ford’s cover story this week – is whether we can do better this time. Must exploitation and conflict inevitably accompany exploration and expansion? Or can we learn the lessons of the past and reap the benefits of expansion without falling prey to its temptations?

The case is an odd one. The Arctic’s potential has always been there; it has just been locked in a deep freeze. As the climate changes, polar ice is dramatically retreating. The consequences for the planet could well be severe, even catastrophic. But unless something changes, it is a fact that the Arctic will be increasingly open for business – an unexpected new frontier. How the world responds will be a test of how its views of power have changed – or not.

Of course, the negative drivers of fear, dominance, and exploitation are still percolating. And not surprisingly, they’re most apparent in authoritarian countries like Russia and China. Their interest in the Arctic recalls the Great Game of the 19th century, when British and Russian men with glorious handlebar mustaches competed for influence in Central Asia, or the cold war of the 20th. Russian President Vladimir Putin is still in this world. Chinese President Xi Jinping is trying to pioneer its 21st-century equivalent: global economic dominance.

But the post-World War II order offers a different model. It suggests that more powerful than national ideologies are universal ideals of freedom, human rights, and collaboration. And that when nations of goodwill work together to put these values first, the world makes remarkable strides on almost every metric of human progress.

Already, there are positive signs in the Arctic. Institutions like the Arctic Council, born of the cooperative spirit of the post-World War II era, have so far helped keep the lowest motivations in check. But that work takes vigilance.

Authoritarian regimes often excel at banging their shoes loudly in promotion of their narrow vision. But the fact is, the rest of the world has a better story to tell.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.