Exploring Ice and Snow in the Cold War (original) (raw)
Related papers
In search of control: Arctic weather stations in the early Cold War
2016
Matthias Heymann discusses the importance of meteorological data from Greenland not only for the successful prosecution of the Allied war effort, but also for support of aviation—both civilian and military—during the Cold War. The US military established and expanded weather observation stations in Greenland during the war, but immediately after, Denmark sought to regain control of the weather stations and their observational data despite a scarcity of resources. However, the US military not only wanted to continue operating these stations, but to build a chain of Arctic weather stations in northern Canada and Greenland. Although Canada and Denmark could not say “no” to the USA, they did work hard to guard their sovereign interests. Investigating the role of Arctic weather stations as contested scientific, political, and military installations, Heymann argues that weather stations not only provided meteorological information—they served as symbols for sovereignty, political, and mil...
2021
Between 1957 and 1961, members of Congress spearheaded efforts to gain authorization for the U.S. Coast Guard to construct a nuclear-powered icebreaker. This article uses congressional hearings, debates, and media coverage to conduct a frame analysis and map the arguments, themes, and stories used to convince decision-makers to build the vessel. While state competition became the central frame used by American nuclear icebreaker proponents, national security, science and technology, an uncertain future, and technical details about the existing fleet’s decline were also popular narratives. Although the push for a nuclear icebreaker enjoyed popular bi-partisan and bi-cameral support in Congress, it failed to convince a budget-conscious Eisenhower administration. De 1957 à 1961, les membres du Congrès se sont efforcés d’obtenir l’autorisation de la Garde côtière américaine de construire un brise-glace à propulsion nucléaire. À l’aide d’audiences du Congrès, de débats et de reportages d...
Journal of Historical Geography, 2014
From the 1930s through the 1950sdthe decades bracketing the second and third international polar yearsdresearch in the physical and biological environmental sciences of the Arctic increased dramatically. The heroic, expedition-based style of Arctic science, dominant in the first decades of the twentieth century, gave way to a systematic, long-term, strategic and largely statefunded model of research which increased both Arctic presence and the volume of research output. Factors that made this change possible were distinct for each of the five circumpolar nation-states considered here. For Soviet leaders, the Arctic was an untamed land containing vast economic resources, all within reach if its long-sought Northern Sea Route became reality; Soviet officials sought environmental knowledge of this region with a range of motivations from economic and strategic concerns to enhancing the prestige of socialism. In contrast, United States officials largely ignored the Arctic until the outbreak of World War II, when military commanders quickly grasped the strategic importance of this region. Anxious that the Arctic might become a literal battleground between East and West by 1947, as the Cold War began, Pentagon leaders funded vast northern research programs, including in strategically located Greenland. Canadian leadersdwhile appreciating the national security concerns of its powerful southern neighbordwere even more concerned with maintaining sovereignty over its northern territories and gaining knowledge to assist its northern economic ambitions. Norway and Sweden, as smaller states, faced distinct challenges. With strong claims to Arctic heritage but limited resources, leaders of these states sought to create independent research strategies while, especially in the case of Norway, protecting their geopolitical interests in relation to the Soviet Union and the U.S. This article provides the first internationally comparative study of the multiple economic, military, political, and strategic factors that motivated scientific activities and programs in the far north, from the interwar period through World War II and the Cold War, when carefully coordinated, station-based research programs were introduced. The production of knowledge about Arctic's physical environmentdincluding its changing climatedhad little resemblance either to ideas of science-based 'progress,' or responses to perceived environmental concerns. Instead, it demonstrates that strategic military, economic, geopolitical, and national security concerns influenced and shaped most science undertakings, including those of the International Polar Year of 1932e1933 and the following polar year, the International Geophysical Year of 1957e1958.
Antarctica: World Hunger for Oil Spurs Security Council Review
Science, 1974
only a few kilotons for "killing" enemy warheads at close range within the atmosphere. The accuracy of the Spartan ABM, designed for nuclear duels above the atmosphere, is being refined, and as its "miss-distance" declines from a few tens of kilometers, a much smaller warhead may suffice. Weapons effects work would also continue, although possibly at some disadvantage; the radiation profile of small-yield devices generally is not the same as from large devices. Similarly, stockpile-sampling could also continue, although large thermonuclear weapons could not be fired at their full yield. While the military may find this unsettling, arms control advocates contend that any uncertainties in the reliability of the deterrent force tend to discourage thinking about preemptive "first strikes." Uncertainties felt equally by both sides are viewed as stabilizing. Plowshare-type explosions for peaceful purposes, however, may be a source of problems. Most of the devices developed in the United States run 30 kilotons or more, and the Soviets' presumably are no smaller. Scoville, among others, notes that a plowshare program could be used as a cover for weapons work. Whether such work would significantly affect the U.S.-Soviet balance of power is a matter of disagreement.
From the 1930s through the 1950s--the decades bracketing the second and third international polar years--research in the physical and biological environmental sciences of the Arctic increased dramatically. The heroic, expedition-based style of Arctic science, dominant in the first decades of the twentieth century, gave way to a systematic, long-term, strategic and largely state-funded model of research which increased both Arctic presence and the volume of research output. Factors that made this change possible were distinct for each of the five circumpolar nation-states considered here. For Soviet leaders, the Arctic was an untamed land containing vast economic resources, all within reach if its long-sought Northern Sea Route became reality; Soviet officials sought environmental knowledge of this region with a range of motivations from economic and strategic concerns to enhancing the prestige of socialism. In contrast, United States officials largely ignored the Arctic until the outbreak of World War II, when military commanders quickly grasped the strategic importance of this region. Anxious that the Arctic might become a literal battleground between East and West by 1947, as the Cold War began, Pentagon leaders funded vast northern research programs, including in strategically located Greenland. Canadian leaders--while appreciating the national security concerns of its powerful southern neighbor--were even more concerned with maintaining sovereignty over its northern territories and gaining knowledge to assist its northern economic ambitions. Norway and Sweden, as smaller states, faced distinct challenges. With strong claims to Arctic heritage but limited resources, leaders of these states sought to create independent research strategies while, especially in the case of Norway, protecting their geopolitical interests in relation to the Soviet Union and the U.S. This article provides the first internationally comparative study of the multiple economic, military, political, and strategic factors that motivated scientific activities and programs in the far north, from the interwar period through World War II and the Cold War, when carefully coordinated, station-based research programs were introduced. The production of knowledge about Arctic's physical environment--including its changing climate--had little resemblance either to ideas of science-based 'progress,' or responses to perceived environmental concerns. Instead, it demonstrates that strategic military, economic, geopolitical, and national security concerns influenced and shaped science undertakings in this region, including those of the International Polar Year of 1932-1933 and the following polar year, the International Geophysical Year of 1957-1958.
Hard Facts About Nuclear Winter
Andrew Revkin wrote this cover story on the nuclear winter hypothesis for Science Digest (March, 1985). The article won the American Association for the Advancement of Science science journalism award that year (for magazines) and an Olive Branch Award from the New York University Center for War, Peace and the News Media.
The Joint Arctic Weather Stations: Science and Sovereignty in the High Arctic, 1946-1972
University of Calgary Press, 2022
This is the first systematic account of the Joint Arctic Weather Stations (JAWS), a collaborative science program between Canada and the United States that created a distinctive state presence in the Canadian Arctic Archipelago from 1946-1972. These five meteorological stations, constructed at Eureka, Resolute, Isachsen, Mould Bay, and Alert, became remote hubs for science and sovereignty, revealing the possibilities and limits of modernity in the High Arctic. Drawing on extensive archival evidence, unpublished personal memoirs, and interviews with former JAWS personnel, this book systematically analyzes the diplomatic, scientific, social, environmental, and civil-military dimensions of this binational program. From the corridors of power in Washington and Ottawa to everyday life at the small outposts, The Joint Arctic Weather Stations explores delicate statecraft, changing scientific practices, as well as the distinctive station cultures that emerged as humans coped with isolation in polar environments.
Temperature, 2017
The new cold war As researchers for the Defence Research and Development Canada, attending field trials, military exercises and operations for data collection purposes is a common and exciting part of the job. Over the past few years while conducting research during Arctic operations (Figure 1) we have experienced the challenges of trying to conduct basics tasks outside in the extreme cold. As civilian scientists, embedded with members of our Canadian Army (Figure 2) in the Arctic, this has been an extraordinary way to appreciate the challenges of the Arctic's harsh environment. There is nothing like personally suffering from frostbite to appreciate this! Canada has one of the longest Arctic coastlines in the world, and there are significant reasons why the Canadian Armed Forces and its partners have, do, and will need a human presence there to guard this unique part of the world. Global warming and the accompanying opening of east-west passages across the region threatens North American sovereignty in the Arctic, by enabling a greater human presence in the vast expanse of the North for purposes that range from the economic (shipping, natural resources exploration) to new security challenges including criminal activity (e.g., smuggling, illegal immigration, illegal fishing) to increased tourism. 1 The military has a common saying "no plan survives first contact with the enemy". North of 60 , in the high Arctic, one persistent and capable enemy of the CAF is the extreme cold. The temperatures in Northern Canada, (which comprises the sub-Arctic, Arctic and the high Arctic) during the winter months can range from anywhere from ¡10 to ¡60 C. 1 Besides the cold, weather conditions such as fog, ice fog and blizzards present further challenges for operating in the Arctic. Together, these conditions pose a series of challenges that affect the Canadian Armed Forces' mobility, equipment, human performance, personal health protection, and basic survival when operating in the Arctic. History of CAF operations in the Arctic When reviewing historic documents on past Canadian Armed Forces winter exercises over the last 70 years, it is interesting to find that even with our many advances in textiles (especially in the commercial/resource extraction, and outdoor sports industries), communication, technology, and building materials, many of the same or similar challenges that were an issue all those decades ago continue to be a challenge today. Overland (and ice) transportation, dismounted mobility, communication, health maintenance, psychological effects of isolation, casualty evacuation, regular equipment, transportation equipment, nutrition, personal protective kit and frostbite treatment persist as challenges for personnel working in the Arctic. The apparent lack of progress highlights the harsh reality of the Arctic where the extreme cold can quickly render technology or a person completely ineffective. When operating in severe or extreme cold conditions (¡35 C and below) basic survival is vital and therefore it is not uncommon for normal functions that we take for granted in thermo-neutral or warm settings, like the ability to use the hands for fine motor tasks, maintaining basic thermal comfort and health protection to become allconsuming priorities. Current cold weather injuries impacting Canadian Armed Forces in the Arctic The Canadian Arctic covers such a wide area that the most reasonable mode of transportation for Canadian Armed Forces members is snowmobile (Figure 3) (despite the romantic notion that Canadian soldiers use dog