The Polar Retrospective looks at stories of the past week that are related to the Arctic and Antarctic and focuses on one or more aspects. This time, editor-in-chief Dr. Michael Wenger takes a personal look at Alaska after a three-week trip through the largest US state and finds that the smallest part of the Arctic presents some contrasts, but still inspires.
This article is a personal commentary by the Editor-in-Chief of Polar Journal AG. Both the choice of words and the content of this polar retrospective only reflect the opinion of the writer and do not automatically reflect the opinion of Polar Journal AG as an institution.
Alaska is an Arctic region that I have somewhat neglected in recent years and perhaps considered too “small” in the big Arctic picture. Yet it is anything but small. With an area of over 1.7 million square kilometers, it is the largest of the fifty US states and beats its competitors Texas, California and Montana by far. The highest peak on the North American continent, Mount Denali at 6,190 meters, towers in the middle of the state, visible from afar. It is also the state with the longest coastline of the USA. The four largest cities in the USA in terms of area are also located in Alaska and the state holds the largest national park in the USA, the Wrangell-St. Elias National Park.
Contrast between nature conservation and environmental protection vs economic development
It is also home to the largest Arctic national nature reserve in the USA and one of the largest and richest oil and gas reserves of the country, the North Slope region in the very north of the state. The largest and longest pipeline in the USA in terms of capacity, the Trans-Alaska Pipeline, which transports over 340 million liters of crude oil per day over a distance of around 1,300 kilometers from north to south, starts in the Arctic north. On its way, it crosses mountain ranges, earthquake zones, permafrost soils and countless rivers and streams. Apart from the pipeline and some access roads, many areas are completely untouched and are considered extremely important areas for nature conservation and for the indigenous peoples of Alaska. This causes a lot of friction and criticism.
For one thing, this megastructure is extremely important for the Alaskan and US economy. On the other hand, it is a constant point of criticism and contention between environmental and indigenous representative organizations and the governments in Juneau and Washington DC. As such, I believe the pipe is a symbol of the contradictions that run like a red line through the US approach to the Arctic.
Throughout the three-week tour through the south and central part of Alaska, I kept coming across contrasts. On the one hand, there was the breathtaking nature (which was more colorful than ever at the beginning of autumn), characterized by glaciers and the Cordillera Ice Sheet, which had covered large parts of Alaska during the last ice age. Alaskans are hugely proud of this nature and the diverse flora and especially fauna, ranging from pikas to moose and bears (whether polar, grizzly or black bears) on land and fish and marine mammals in the water, and they spend a lot of time enjoying outdoor activities such as hiking, fishing and camping. At the same time, you will hardly meet anyone who is not on the road in a huge off-road vehicle or pickup truck that gulps gasoline by the barrel; you will encounter thousands of tons of scrap metal and garbage that simply lies along the highways and on the roads and paths, rusting and rotting away; you will encounter huge tourism infrastructures that take guests willing to pay to the furthest reaches of natural beauty and fulfil almost every (im)possible wish.
Contrast between history vs current politics
Another such contrast was a visit to the small town of North Pole, south-east of Fairbanks in the central part of the state. Here, Christmas is celebrated in all its colorful glory all year round and attracts hundreds of thousands of people every year. You are almost overwhelmed by the smell of gingerbread, Christmas tree decorations, reindeer and Santa Claus figures wishing you “Peace on Earth” and “Merry Christmas” over and over again. All the while, F-35 fighter jets and other military aircraft soar overhead every minute, training interception and attack methods against an opponent so far only mentioned in the strategy papers of the US Department of Defense. Conversations with locals show that although people are aware of the potential threat, they are also realistic. The experience of the Japanese, who occupied some of the Aleutian Islands during the Second World War and overreached themselves logistically, suggests that Alaska is too far away from the more recent adversaries. “Putin is probably biting his butt that we bought our land in 1867 for a mere 2 million US dollars,” explains a bus driver in Anchorage during a tour. “Now we’re here and we’re happy with our country.”
In general, I had the feeling that Alaska’s dealings with Russia are more ambivalent. On the one hand, people are aware of the current geopolitical situation with Russia. Nevertheless, Russia is omnipresent in Alaska due to the state’s history. For a long time, the entire region was part of the Russian Tsarist Empire and would probably have remained so had it not been for some shrewd diplomats with economic foresight. They convinced the Russians to sell this corner to the USA in 1867. The new owners were thus given a new region with a few places that were strongly Russian and influenced by the Russian Orthodox Church, which is still reflected in some of the names of places and people. In many places, especially in the south of the state, you will also find many witnesses to the old Russian presence. Be it churches and cemeteries, but also buildings that have defied the centuries.
But despite the acceptance of history and the preparatory work of the Russian residents (the USA hardly had any more problems with hostile natives), names like “Russian River” are unceremoniously changed to “American River” or houses are painted in the colors of Ukraine, signs like “Putin go to hell” are hung in the window.
Contrast Indigenous representation in Alaska vs other Arctic regions
Another contrast that popped up during the three weeks (which is admittedly short for a diverse region like Alaska) is the contact with the indigenous cultures of Alaska. From my numerous stays in Nunavut and Greenland, I have been used to being informed at every turn about the diverse cultural achievements and hertiage of Arctic indigenous peoples, their way of life and also their lives today. When traveling in Arctic Canada or Greenland, there is hardly a sign, plaque or even a piece of writing that is not written in Inuktitut and Kaalalisuut in addition to English/French (for Canada) and Danish (for Greenland).
Yet, in the regions I visited in western, southwestern, southern and central Alaska, such indigenous signs are less visible and prominent, although the people play a significant role in society and everyday life. Indigenous rights organizations are widespread and influential, both politically and socially. Nevertheless, they seem to be more discreet in their presence and much of what is known from other Arctic and sub-Arctic regions such as Nunavik and Nunavut or in the Scandinavian regions is less common in Alaska. In many places there are centers that provide information about the history, culture and way of life of the respective indigenous population group; in bookstores and stores there are numerous books and handicraft items for sale. But it still seemed more hidden and less prominently displayed.
There may be various reasons for this, such as the enormous diversity of different cultures and indigenous ethnic groups, making it difficult to pursue a collaborative strategy; perhaps it is purely financial, with much less funding available to groups and organizations; perhaps it is a greater assimilation of the indigenous population into US society and thus a lesser need to stand out more; perhaps it is simply reticence; or perhaps it is simply a subjective perception on my part, having been very much involved with the issue in other Arctic regions over the past year. That said, the three weeks I spent stopping in Kodiak, Katmai, Nome, Anchorage, Fairbanks, Seward and many areas in between to get a feel for this Arctic region showed me that Alaska is a world of its own, full of wonder and natural beauty, but also full of contrasts.
Dr. Michael Wenger, Polar Journal AG
