← New Books Network
New Books Network
Mia Bennett and Klaus Dodds, "Unfrozen: The Fight for the Future of the Arctic" (Yale UP, 2025)
00:37:24
Loading summary
Transcript40 lines
- [00:01]
A
This episode is brought to you by Jack Daniels. Jack Daniels and music are made for each other. They share a rhythm in the craft of making something timeless while being a part of legendary nights. From backyard jams to sold out arenas, there's a song in every toast.
- [00:16]
B
Please drink responsibly.
- [00:17]
A
Responsibility.org, jack Daniels and Old no. 7 are registered trademarks. Tennessee whiskey, 40% alcohol by volume. Jack Daniel Distillery, Lynchburg, Tennessee.
- [00:28]
C
At New Balance, we believe if you run, you're a runner, however you choose to do it. Because when you're not worried about doing things the right way.
- [00:44]
A
You'Re free to discover your way.
- [00:48]
C
And that's what running is all about. Run your way@newbalance.com running.
- [00:58]
A
Well, I was down on my last dollar Then I started saving because the bank said fiscal restraint is what you're craving so I put my earnings in a high yield account Let the savings compound and the interest mount I'm optimizing cash flow, putting debt in check now time is my friend and not a pain in the neck and we've got a little cash to rebuild the old deck Boring money moves make kind of lame songs but they sound pretty sweet to your wallet brilliantly boring since 1865. Welcome to the New Books Network.
- [01:31]
B
Welcome to the New Books Network. My name is Leo Bader and today I'm talking to Mia Bennett, professor of Geography at the University of Washington, and Klaus Dodds, who until very recently was Executive Dean of the School of Life Sciences at Royal Holloway University of London. Klaus and Mia's new book, the Fight for the Future of the Arctic, examines this essential yet under discussed region from an ecological and and a geopolitical standpoint, explaining how forces of climate change, great power, competition and economic development are rapidly changing life in the Arctic itself and its importance for the rest of the world. Klaus and Mia, thanks for joining me. Why don't you start by just explaining where and what the Arctic is, which, as I understand from your book, is not as simple a question as it may seem.
- [02:17]
A
Well, shall I start first in terms of offering the classic geographer's answer, which is that any region of the world is not self evident in terms of how we define it. And although, for example, in the case of the Arctic, it's common to define the region as everything north of the Arctic Circle, 66 degrees north. In the history of geography, our discipline, it's also been the case that various biogeographical, climatological indicators have been used as well to define this place we call the Arctic. So one of the classic indicators used to be the extent of the tree line. So everything north of the tree line, that is where the Arctic started. One of the things that we try to do in Unfrozen is to suggest that whether you define the Arctic through a line of latitude, whether you define it through the association of what is termed Arctic states, or whether you try to look to biogeography and say there are various unique indicators that define the Arctic, a lot of this is being scrambled. And so part of the rationale for having the book called Unfrozen was simply to say that actually what we thought we knew about the Arctic is. Is being challenged in some fundamental sense.
- [03:47]
B
And you approach the book from both an ecological and a geopolitical standpoint. What is the impetus for taking this kind of dual approach? And why can't or why shouldn't we look at these issues separately?
- [04:01]
A
Well, in terms of the making sense of this sort of fusion of, say, the ecological and the geopolitical, our argument was that it's very, very hard to make sense of ecological change affecting the Arctic if you're not sensitive to some of the geopolitical developments affecting the region, and vice versa. So I think our starting point was to take very seriously what the Arctic Report Card, which was produced by the US Agency NOAA concluded a couple of years ago, which is that the Arctic is no longer reliably frozen. And from that, we argue that actually it really is important to see the two as intersecting with one another, because actually, about the time where there's this heightened geopolitical interest, arguably from 2007, 8 onwards, that actually coincided with a record low in Arctic Ocean sea ice. And ever since then, it's been very hard to shake this association that as the Arctic melts and thaws, so geopolitical interest just continues to grow and grow and grow.
- [05:17]
B
So talking about that record low sea ice, what are the primary drivers of that from an ecological standpoint? And how does low sea ice structurally change the environment of the Arctic?
- [05:29]
C
Yeah, that's a great question. So, as we kind of explain in the book, Arctic sea ice is now only about a 25% of its previous volume. So that's a result of the drastic shrinking in extent and flow thinning of the sea ice that previously, as we note, a hunter would have to dig a staircase down to the ice to go ice fishing. But now that ice is sometimes only, you know, less than a meter thick. So with this reduction in sea ice, which itself is driven by the fact that as you have increasing carbon dioxide, the atmosphere is warming. Arctic sea ice melts, and then you have a drastic shift from what was once frozen sea ice that reflected a lot of sunlight due to being white, to then this open, very dark ocean that just absorbs more and more heat. So that's why the Arctic is accelerating and it's warming at a rate that is four times faster than the global average. So with that, there's a whole host of kind of new uses of the Arctic Ocean. So you could have increased shipping, of course, but also potential potentially more fishing, offshore oil and gas extraction. Lots of opportunities open up, but you also have lots of decreases to potential traditional uses, such as ice fishing, as I was mentioning, but also hunting and transportation for indigenous peoples.
- [06:48]
B
Let's talk a little bit more about that latter point. You mentioned throughout your book that there are actually quite a lot of people living in the Arctic and all various areas, and that their lives are sort of consistently impacted by the international involvement in the Arctic, by resource extraction, by the changing ice levels. So how exactly is their life changing and how much political weight do they have in trying to influence how the Arctic is treated internationally?
- [07:19]
C
Sure, I can take a stab at that and then toss if you want to jump in. I think, as you point out, we try to highlight in the book is that the Arctic is very much a peopled region. It has been for tens of thousands of years and continues to be so, with now 4 million people or so living north of the Arctic Circle. And I think about a half a million of those people are indigenous. So you have both the descendants of colonists, more recent settlers, and then indigenous people. So very diverse landscape in places like Greenland. There's also a number of Thai and Filipino migrants. So a real kind of patchwork of people. But if we think specifically about the power that's been amassed by Arctic indigenous peoples, they've been, to varying degrees, quite successful in terms of organizing. I would say a highlight is really the Inuit people who have formed both native organizations in places like Alaska and Canada, and then transnational organizations as well, such as the Inuit Circumpolar Council. The Sami have also done the same. So those are just a couple of the groups that have succeeded. But things are a lot harder in a country such as Russia where indigenous peoples face a lot of opposition and repression.
- [08:31]
B
And how have these councils of indigenous populations managed to interact with the nation state or the Arctic? Have they found adequate recognition or managed to negotiate equitable relationships with those nations?
- [08:48]
A
Yeah, I mean, I think it is a really important question, Leah, because the history of Indigenous activism, certainly in the modern period really dates from the 1970s, when across the circumpolar Arctic, notably outside the Soviet Arctic as opposed to the European and North American Arctic, Indigenous peoples increasingly formed national and indeed transnational organizations that were designed, I think, to actively either contest the very worst excesses of settler colonialism, assimilationist politics, Cold War militarism, but at the same time, as well as contesting, also demanding, so demanding greater autonomy, greater land rights, for example, resource rights. And a lot of that was remarkably successful over time. So of course, in the case of the Nordic part of the Arctic region, you see, for example, Sami parliaments in Norway, Sweden, Finland. In Canada, you had really extensive land claims treaties and agreements. Notably in Alaska, you. You had native corporations, for example, being created in the 1970s as a prelude to the extraction of oil and the introduction of the Transatlaska pipeline. And what that meant is, in short, is that indigenous peoples became really important, actually commercial and business stakeholders. And that matters because when we always turn to these debates about whether mining or extraction is a bad thing in the Arctic, it's really important to remember that actually it's Indigenous peoples are often quite sympathetic to extraction projects and things like mining because it generates revenue, it creates employment, often stimulates infrastructure and so on. And that's something to be borne in mind when you hear demands from elsewhere. We must always save the Arctic, protect the Arctic, conserve the Arctic. So it's a complicated story. The struggle for independence and autonomy is not over by any means, but indigenous peoples have come a huge way since the 1970s.
- [11:12]
B
I would say let's talk a bit more about that. Resource extraction. What kind of resources are in the Arctic and who is looking to extract them? And secondarily, what effects do they have on the Arctic itself?
- [11:26]
A
Well, let me just follow up briefly and just kind of set the scene. Amir, please feel free to sort of add to this. But the first thing Leo's really important to say, and it's something we stress in the book, is that we. Resource extraction is not new in the Arctic. Again, there's a long history of extracting things from the Arctic. Certainly during the European colonial era, say of the last 500 years or so, for argument's sake, you've got plenty of things coming out of the Arctic. Whales, seals, fish, timber, coal, gold, you name it, there's usually been some kind of resource rush or scramble to extract something from the Arctic. It's become more complicated over time because different stakeholders, actors become involved, from large corporations, oil and gas corporations, to indigenous run corporations. Extracting again all kinds of minerals and resources. It's big business in many parts of the Arctic. It's a major employer of many settler communities as well as indigenous peoples. And for example, in Russia, certainly contemporary Russia, the Arctic zone of the Russian Federation is big, absolutely integral to the future of the Federation itself. So there's a kind of extraordinary story actually of resource development. And really in the Russian Arctic, what you're seeing is new players. You're seeing Saudi Arabia become involved, United Arab Emirates become involved alongside China, India and others. And certainly when you start to follow the money in terms of resource development, resource extraction, you can see how the Arctic is bedded in global networks of extraction and exchange.
- [13:17]
C
Yeah, thank you, Klaus. I would just add a couple more industries to that mix that we're seeing develop that we also try to bring out in the book as well. And that would be critical minerals. Of course, we've heard a lot about Greenland news and the Trump administration having its sights set on this integral part of the Danish Kingdom and also a country where a majority of people very much want independence. Greenland has a great amount of these rare earths. So that's one deposit that stands to be developed. There's also a major deposit that's been found in Sweden. So a lot of these other areas are starting to try to contribute to the so called wind transition. And then we're also seeing wind power developed in places like Sweden and Norway, often to the great consternation of Sami people, whose reindeer herding pastures are in many cases being overrun by these wind turbines.
- [14:11]
B
So as we see countries that don't actually border the Arctic, like Saudi Arabia or like China, become more economically involved in the region, how is that changing the political balance of nations that have a presence there? How are Arctic nations like Sweden or Norway or the US dealing with.
- [14:31]
A
I mean, again, I think when you look at things like economic development, whether it's resource extraction, whether it's, for example, related to tourism or whatever, the picture that emerges over and over again is that the Arctic has become more globalized in some fundamental sense. So whether it's Chinese tourists going to the north of the Scandinavian Arctic, for example, or. Or as we said just a moment ago, whether it's India becoming a very large refiner of Russian crude oil that's come from the north of the Russian Federation, what it suggests is, and this does unsettle Arctic states, who for so long have thought of the Arctic as their circumpolar region. And so there is this kind of productive tension, I think, amongst Arctic states in terms of on the one hand, often wanting at one point or another investment, third party engagement and all the rest of it. But on the other hand, of course, now thinking with the degree of trepidation, well, where does this all end in terms of our Arctic becoming their Arctic? So there is this, I think this tension you see in Russia at the moment in terms of where this relationship with China will take us. You also see it in the Nordic Arctic, actually, where countries started to retreat somewhat from Chinese investment and Chinese interest. And then we shouldn't forget, even, of course, in the North American Arctic, that personal flashpoint, Donald Trump with all his articulations around annexing Canada, Greenland, that's also produced a different kind of unease this time, of course, within the Arctic state community.
- [16:24]
B
How is Trump's administration affecting cooperation in the Arctic? You mention in your book that a lot of research funding has disappeared. And as you just mentioned, there are talks or propositions of annexing various Arctic territories. How, how are other nations dealing with this and what might emerge out of this?
- [16:47]
A
Upgrade your laundry routine with a durable and reliable Maytag laundry pair at Lowe'. Like the new Maytag washer and dryer with performance enhanced stain fighting power designed to cut through serious dirt and grime. And what's great is this laundry pair is in stock and ready for delivery when you need it the most. Don't miss out. Shop Maytag in store or online today at Lowe's.
- [17:16]
C
This episode is brought to you by State Farm. Listening to this podcast, Smart move. Being financially savvy. Smart move. Another smart move, having State Farm help you create a competitive price when you choose to bundle home and auto bundling. Just another way to save with a personal price plan like a good neighbor. State Farm is there. Prices are based on rating plans that vary by state. Coverage options are selected by the customer, availability, amount of discounts and savings and eligibility vary by state. Yeah, Leo, this is a very timely question. I think honestly the picture gets worse week to by week. So in January when Trump took office, of course we saw as we were discussing kind of all these calls to annex Greenland, which really, I think unnerved Denmark as well, and the wider picture of cooperation between the so called Arctic 7. So that's all of the Arctic Council members face, minus Russia. All of those countries are now NATO members. But the fact that the US Seems to really be stepping away from kind of these liberal values that upheld kind of the liberal international order that also believed in science and rationality is really, I think making the kind of idea of Arctic cooperation very hard. To uphold, as it has probably through the past 30 years. Just last week, the U.S. arctic. U.S. what is the acronym? ARCUS. I'm forgetting what it stands for. The Arctic Research Commission of the US that's being shuttered. The Wilson center and their Polar Research Institute was shut down earlier in the year by Doge. I have a scientist colleague who went to Kingerlussuaq, where a lot of US Scientists were every summer, and she said it was just absolutely quiet this summer. Very few scientists returned because we're seeing so much funding cut to programs that were led by US Research scientists, but in many ways brought together the international community. So this is a big blow to our diplomatic cooperation and scientific cooperation as well. So I think, honestly, it's been quite devastating.
- [19:23]
A
Yeah, I would just absolutely second that. I mean, I think it is really very difficult to row back from those comments made in December, January about annexing Greenland, for example, which caused a degree of diplomatic panic in Denmark. Clearly, as we know, the relationship between the United States and Canada was unsettled by further comments about Canada becoming the 51st state. And however far the United States is able to reassure and recalibrate those relationships with economically and politically smaller and averta commas allies, that has been something of a body blow, because actually, as we sort of suggest in the book as well, we talk a lot about the Arctic eight, and they range obviously in size from the Russian Federation to Iceland in terms of big and small. We talk about a split, of course, between the Russian Federation and the Arctic seven, all NATO states, as Mia noted. Now we've got an Arctic six and Antarctic two, two great powers who, on the face of it, are behaving like great powers, in other words, thinking they have a sphere of influence and are perfectly capable, as and when required, to treat smaller states, even allied states, with a degree of carelessness on the one hand or disdain on the other. And as Mia suggests, it's really been very devastating to the very delicate Arctic diplomatic ecology, which relied for really a number of decades now on this circumpolar sense of common purpose. Common purpose grounded in indigenous peoples, environmental protection, sustainable development, scientific endeavor. All of that is fracturing. And you talk to a lot of people privately, and they did talk to us privately for the book, and they were incredibly skeptical about whether that circumpolarity, if you like, could be restored. Again, it's very, very sad.
- [21:42]
B
On the subject of NATO, what concrete security implications does the Arctic have when you have this kind of great power competition developing? You mention in your book that the US tried to station nuclear weapons in the Arctic back during the Cold War. There's critical infrastructure running through the Arctic. So what kinds of flashpoints are there that these great power tensions might spill over into?
- [22:07]
A
Well, in the book itself, we identify a number of potential flashpoints and they range from potential contested politics around the management of the Norwegian archipelago, Svalbard, a return to tension over the long term ownership of Greenland, an emerging geographical space, the central Arctic Ocean that's garnering more interest. And then ones we also mention, which are, of course, the extension of the NATO Russian borderland with the accession of Finland into the NATO family, and the Bering Strait, which separates North America from Asia, where, for example, Russia and China have been conducting joint maritime and aerial patrols. And there is, as we say, conflict is not inevitable. But there's increasingly a story here of risky behavior, escalatory behavior from underwater sabotage, GPS jamming, drone flights in and around the Arctic and indeed in the Baltic Sea. So we worry in the book that although parties may not get into a direct confrontation, there is always that danger. And just to note, Leo, early in the year the Ukrainians carried out an audacious drone related attack on a Russian airbase in the northwest of the country, north of the Arctic Circle. So hot war has returned to the Arctic, courtesy of Ukraine, if you will. So another indication, if you like, of the Arctic being entangled in one way or another in global affairs. But the Arctic is also entangled the other way around. And global affairs increasingly can't avoid the Arctic climatologically, geopolitically.
- [24:10]
B
I'm curious about whether you see any direct competition between the US And China on that note. Is it more that they're sort of independently pursuing economic extraction and development in the Arctic, or do you see this rivalry that kind of exists everywhere else in the world also becoming a jostling point in the Arctic?
- [24:30]
A
Well, Mia, should I have a go at this first war and then please feel free to pick up. I mean, the thing I would say, Leah, which I think is something we're both interested in in terms of longer term, is whether Trump and Putin are able to engineer a rapprochement, say for argument, some kind of settlement is done over Ukraine. And then from the United States point of view, and this all really goes back to the Henry Kissinger era. You know, if Russia and China are getting too close to one another, then you want to break it apart. So one way you would do that is you say to Putin, look, we have our sphere of influence, which is the Caribbean. It's The Americas, we recognize you have your own sphere of influence, your security concerns. We don't have to clash with one another. There are ways we can do business with one another. And by the way, you must be concerned about the growing presence of China in your economic, political, territorial affairs. So why don't we engineer a rapprochement and actually see if we can do some work together on energy infrastructure. And as you know, Leo, there's even been speculation about some deal being done in and around Ukraine as well. So I think the concern amongst smaller Arctic states is that in the end, this circumpolar way of doing business will just get shunted to one side long term. And actually, it's all going to be about summit diplomacy, personal deals, and from the United States point of view, trying to put China in its place and really potentially looking to build a new kind of alliance with the Russian Federation around areas where they can coincide in as a way of trying to yet again put more pressure on China.
- [26:22]
C
Yeah, I think Klaus summed that up brilliantly. What I might just add is that if we look at the state of U.S. china relations in the Arctic, they've definitely soured in recent years. You only have to go back to 2017 or so. That was year, I believe, when President Xi Jinping of China visited Alaska to talk about potentially signing a deal on a gas pipeline from the north of Alaska down to the south that would export liquefied natural gas or lng, to China and other Asian markets. That deal, or that wasn't really a deal, but it was kind of a memorandum of interest that fell apart. And then just a couple of years later, we saw during the first Trump administration, former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo really basically belittling China at the Arctic Council ministerial meeting in Rovin, Me saying that there's no such thing as near Arctic states, which is what China has professed itself to be in this Arctic policy. So things have really taken a turn for the worse. Every summer now, we see Chinese and Russian vessels carrying out joint exercises in the Bering Strait, which many Alaskan and federal officials react quite negatively to. In contrast, other American military strategists try to say everything is normal. These are just kind of freedom of navigation operations that are not really disturbing the US at all. But I think there's a lot of unease among locals and Alaskan politicians in particular as to what China and Russia together may really be planning in the Bering Strait as flashpoint that we talk about.
- [27:54]
B
You mention in your book three descriptors for a possible Arctic future, which are an extractive Arctic, an adversarial Arctic, and an endangered Arctic. So, briefly, what do these mean, and how might they emerge in the coming years?
- [28:11]
C
I could start with the endangered Arctic, then, Klaus, if you want to describe the other two, perhaps. So with the endangered Arctic, I think we basically tried to amplify the concerns among indigenous communities, other local users, scientists, that are really ringing the alarm bells for how drastically and rapidly the Arctic climate and ecology are shifting. So, of course, we have the thinning sea ice, which everyone is well aware of by now. But you also have, every summer, just devastating boreal fires sweeping across the taiga, forcing entire cities such as Yellow Neck to evacuate for up to a month. It was the other summer. You have species of fish moving northward, which are changing, kind of the traditional species are the availability of them for local users. You have other species on land migrating north as well. Permafrost is thawing, which is destabilizing the foundations of infrastructure that was built during much colder times. So the Arctic as we know it, as we kind of talk about, is very much no longer reliably frozen. And that, of course, has all sorts of geopolitical and economic ramifications.
- [29:19]
A
Yeah, and the adversarial Arctic is one where, frankly speaking, this great power competition starts to unleash itself. And so the concern the book articulates is if we're not careful, we will find ourselves one miscalculation or accident away from direct confrontation. It might be between the United States and China. It might be between the United States and a Russian Chinese joint force. It is genuinely a real worry that if you look across the Arctic, there's been a real upsurge in military training, in maritime and aerial patrolling. Russia, for example, is committed to developing its hypersonic missile program and using the Arctic as a test ground. There's even been concern about nuclear testing possibly being restarted. Nuclear submarine production continues at a pace. And now, for example, the Royal Navy here in the United Kingdom is talking about an Atlantic bastion that also stretches into the Arctic that has to be vigorously defended from potential threats from Russian nuclear submarines. So it does all look and feel a little bit like we're back in the Cold War again, with the Arctic being very much the northern front, if you like. So that was the adversarial Arctic, the extractive Arctic. And by the way, none of these Arctics have to be in opposition to one another. They can be threaded through one another. They can intersect with one another, but the extractive Arctic is simply, if we are to transition away from oil and gas, as many people would hope, as part of the combating of global warming, then whether we like it or not, we will be mining for more substances to enable a low carbon transition. But if, on the other hand, you're not particularly invested in climate change and you think it's all a big old hoax, you can still also be deeply committed to an extractive Arctic, because if nothing else, President Trump has been absolutely consistent in his demand that the United States enjoy energy dominance. And there's no reason not to think that protected federal lands, for example, national parks, reserves, might not find themselves facing exposure in terms of oil, gas and other mineral extraction. And that was, after all, one of the reasons why I think President Trump was very interested in Greenland was precisely as Meares mentioned, this critical rare earth mineral potential. So the extractive Arctic, in other words, says, look, although many people would prefer a more protected, conservationist minded approach to the Arctic, we might find, I'm afraid, anything but. And oil, gas, minerals, unfortunately, yet again, being taken away and being used elsewhere.
- [32:34]
B
Well, it sounds a little bit like one way or another, we're sliding towards some kind of catastrophe in the Arctic. So let me finish by asking, what optimism do you have and what is the best possible way forward considering these kind of intractable political conflicts, economic wealth? What can we do?
- [32:57]
A
Well, if I may, I'll just offer you one observation, Leo, which does give me some optimism. I was genuinely impressed by the way that the government of Greenland was so clear eyed in terms of standing up to some of that provocation from President Trump about annexing Greenland earlier this year. And I do take some comfort from the fact that civil society, although it's taken a battering in many countries, I do think within the indigenous Arctic community, there are a lot of very, very inspirational, often women leaders. And there is, I think, a sense of coherence and a shared sense of this is our time as indigenous peoples and we're not going to be pushed and shoved to one side as if we don't matter anymore. So that's not to say that great power rivalries shouldn't be of huge concern. They should be. But I do take comfort in the fact that this is a very different kind of Arctic, say, from the 1970s, where civil society looked and felt, I think, a lot less developed, a great deal more frayed and exposed. So that's one area I would draw your attention to.
- [34:22]
C
I would absolutely agree with Claassen. I think it is very important to look for these kind of glimmers of hope and what otherwise seems like such a despondent era for the Arctic. A couple other more positive stories I might highlight are we're seeing kind of growth of higher education and searching Arctic communities not across the whole region, but if we look to Norway and Svalbra, they now have a really burgeoning university center which invites students from not only Norway, but around the world to study study Arctic science. In Greenland, there is the University of Nuuk, which trains students all the way up to the PhD level. And at the undergrad level, they recently introduced a bachelor's program that is very much centered on indigenous knowledge of the land resources, water and ice of Greenland. So these are really exciting developments, I think. And then perhaps in another domain I might highlight the successes of the Central Arctic Ocean Fisheries Agreement, which sounds a little bit technical and specialist, but this is quite an important treaty that was signed in 2018 by the Fire barctic states with coastlines on the Arctic Ocean and along with South Korea, China, Japan and the European Union. So quite a kind of diverse picture of maritime nations here. But they all agreed to effectively put place a moratorium on fishing in the Central Arctic Ocean until 2037. So, so this is really the so called precautionary principle in action. They're agreeing to not do any fishing until more scientific knowledge is amassed about this very delicate, fragile region. The parties to that treaty, which include Russia, continue to meet every year. So they were meeting in South Korea for the past couple of years, which I think has presented itself as a really interesting venue for still upholding Arctic cooperation in such a fraught time. And now I think this year the countries will be meeting in Norway. So there's still some multilateral agreement taking place in the Arctic, despite everything you hear about the Arctic Council and these more sub regional organizations being under so much stress. So I think these are some stories of hope that we can still hang onto.
- [36:26]
B
Hopefully there's a sense that there are still institutional structures and civil society structures that although they're facing a lot of pressure, perhaps have a kind of robustness that may be able to provide an avenue forward. We should wrap it up there. Klaus and Mia's book, the Fight for the Future of the Arctic can be purchased on the New Books Network webpage. Klaus and Mia, thanks for joining me.
- [36:52]
A
Thank you.
- [36:53]
C
Thanks so much.