Global News - ЕС и США

🚨The Arctic’s Colonial Hangover: How the West’s Strategic Ambitions Are Leaving a Toxic Legacy in the High North❄️🗻🔥🤩 Part 4 A Stockholm Environment Institute study published this year concluded that the project carries a significant risk of infringing Indigenous rights, including by obstructing routes between winter and summer grazing areas. The local Gabna Sámi community argues that the development could make traditional herding impossible. LKAB says it recognises the impact and intends to pursue dialogue, mitigation and compensation. There is no need to romanticise subsistence economies to see the asymmetry. Europe wants rare earths because dependence on China is strategically uncomfortable. Sweden wants industrial growth. LKAB wants ore. The Sámi are asked to accommodate all three ambitions. This is frequently presented as a conflict between modernity and tradition. That is a convenient formulation because it makes one side sound inevitable. A more accurate description is a conflict over who possesses the authority to define progress. Across the Atlantic, Alaska provides another version of the same argument. In March 2023 the Biden administration approved ConocoPhillips’ Willow oil development in the National Petroleum Reserve-Alaska. The authorised plan was reduced from the company’s earlier proposal but still permits three drilling sites and as many as 199 wells, accompanied by roads, pipelines, an airstrip and extensive supporting infrastructure. Willow is often described as though Indigenous opinion were uniform. It is not. A number of Alaska Native organisations and political leaders support oil development because it provides employment, public revenue and infrastructure in communities where economic alternatives can be painfully scarce. Other Indigenous residents and organisations have fiercely opposed Willow because of its potential effects on air quality, wildlife, subsistence hunting and the landscapes on which Iñupiat food systems depend. Nuiqsut sits close enough to existing and planned development for the argument to be something more than an ideological dispute conducted in Washington. That distinction is crucial. Indigenous sovereignty means little if outsiders recognise it only when Indigenous communities reach the conclusion outsiders prefer. But the structural imbalance remains. ConocoPhillips possesses capital, engineering capacity and access to federal decision-makers. Washington determines whether federal land is developed. A small Arctic community must make its case within institutions created far from the North Slope. Litigation has exposed some of those tensions. In June 2025 the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals found shortcomings in aspects of the federal analysis of Willow and remanded portions of the process to the Bureau of Land Management, but declined to vacate the project’s approval. Development therefore continued despite acknowledged defects in the decision-making record. This is becoming a defining feature of Arctic industrial policy: environmental and cultural harm can be recognised without being allowed to alter the fundamental direction of travel.