8. Why is Alaska still a State?
11 Questions for Alaskans
If a State-wide Referendum on The Future of Alaska was to be held on November 5, 2024, how would You vote on the following Questions?
The possible Answers are: YES, NO, DON’T KNOW, DON’T CARE, and DEPENDS.
1. Do You want oil drilling in the Alaska National Wildlife Refuge?
2. Do You want oil drilling in the National Petroleum Reserve – Alaska?
3. Do You want oil drilling along All of Alaska’s Offshore Waters?
4. Do You want oil drilling along Some of Alaska’s Offshore Waters?
5. Do You want the Tongass Forest to be harvested?
6. Do You want the proposed Pebble Mine to become operational?
7. Do You want the US Navy, Etc, to conduct Training Exercises in the Gulf of Alaska when Fish, Whales and
Other Marine Mammals, and Birds are at or approaching peak migratory activity?
8. Do You want federal anti-marijuana and other drug laws to be enforced in Alaska?
9. Do You want federal gun control laws to be enforced in Alaska?
10. Do You believe that decisions on these Questions should be made by The Peoples of Alaska, and NOT in
Washington?
Wouldn’t it be interesting to learn exactly how the Peoples of Alaska actually, really think and feel about all these things?
It would be particularly interesting to see how the Offshore Drilling, Pebble Mine, and Tongass questions would result; and how those Alaskans who live and make their livelihood by and from The Sea would vote, as opposed to those who do not.
Much as it would be interesting to see how many folks there are who are against Offshore Drilling [at least in their vicinity], but who are at the same time in favor of drilling in the ANWR, the NPRA, and elsewhere away from The Ocean. I know quite a few commercial, charter, and sport Fisherfolks here in Sitka who~ if given the opportunity~ would vote exactly that way.
Given how much Alaskans love their Permanent Fund Dividend checks ~ to say nothing of the livelihoods, lifestyles, and lives that at least not just a few have grown accustomed to [in some cases, almost to the point of entitlement] ~ it would be very interesting to see just how just such a Referendum On Alaska’s Future would tum out, eh?
All of which leads to: Question 11: Why Is Alaska a State?
Why is Alaska the 49th State of the United States of America, and not a sovereign, independent Nation like its neighbors, Canada and Russia?
The question is not HOW Alaska became that State: Czarist Russia ~ which did not even marginally control, let alone “own” Alaska~ “sold” it to the victor of the First American Civil War, the nascently emergent military, economic, and political superpower on the North American continent; which, incidentally, had no more legal, moral, ethical, or any other kind of “right” to “buy” stolen property, in the second place, than did the Russians have a right to sell it, in the first.
Then initially as a military outpost, and subsequently as a Territory, Alaska eventually became that 49th Star on the Flag on January 3, 1959.
That’s How Alaska became a State. The question is: Why is Alaska STILL a State?
At this juncture in Alaska’s, America’s, and the World’s history ~ with Cold War II raging in Europe and seething in East Asia [See Note I below], and who knows what is about to happen in the Middle East involving who knows who ~ would not Alaskans be better served if Alaska was a sovereign, free, and independent, politically economically, and militarily neutral, Federated Republic of Republics, modeled after, for example, Switzerland?
Perhaps it is time for The Peoples of Alaska to ask themselves: What are the benefits ~ to Alaskans and to Alaska~ of The Great Land remaining in the United States, and of them remaining Citizens of that Nation? When they ask that question, they will perhaps also ask themselves: And what are the costs?
And then, perhaps, that would lead them to ask the same questions about becoming that Federated Republic: What would be the benefits? And what would be the costs? But very possibly most interesting and challenging of all: What would be the possibilities and the potentialities?
This is an invitation to explore all of those Questions, and the implications of their Answers. Particularly of #11.
Note 1: On Cold War II ignited in Europe and seething in Asia… :
Two Russians sailing a small boat from Siberia to Alaska last October to seek asylum from their nation’s “mobilization” and military draft should encourage Alaskans to give some very serious thought and consideration to the following facts: [https://www.ktoo.org/2023/01/26/how-and-why-2-russian-men-fled-to-alaska-in-a-small-boat/]
1. That Cold War I~ from the end of World War II to the disintegration of the USSR and European Communism in 1991 ~ was fought in Eastern Europe, Asia, Africa, and Latin America, and thus nowhere near Alaska.
2. That the entire Arctic Region is heating up faster than anyplace else on the Planet; which means that the Arctic Ocean and all its natural resources will be becoming increasingly accessible to exploration and for exploitation. And thus, competition. [https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-arctic-is-warming-four-times-faster-than-the-rest-of-the-planet/]
3. That also means that the Arctic will become as open to merchant shipping and, particularly, combat naval vessels as is every other Ocean on the Planet. Events last August involving a joint Russian-Chinese naval operation off the Aleutians may serve as an indicator of things to come.
4. That Cold War II ~ currently unfolding in Ukraine, East Asia, and elsewhere ~ has begun.
5. Thus: At some point in the non-too-distant future, Alaskans will be on one of the front lines of Cold War II. And they need to start thinking about what that means, and what, if anything, they should ~ or even if they can ~ do about that.
Senator Dan Sullivan spoke of the “the geo-strategic significance of Alaska and the need to continue the state’s military build-up” in his remarks at the Aspen Security Forum in July, and declared that “ensuring the Pentagon develops an adequate Arctic strategy has been a top priority since he was first elected to the Senate.” He stated:
“The forces based in Alaska are closer to Korea, closer to Japan, closer to the Taiwan Strait than our forces based in Hawaii, than forces based in Australia,” said Senator Sullivan at the Aspen Security Forum. “We are making progress on a whole host of areas in the Arctic. But I will tell you—and again, no offense to the Pentagon—every single one of these initiatives has been pushed by the Congress, oftentimes at the reluctance or even opposition of the Pentagon. So we have a long way to go on recognizing the strategic interests in the Arctic.
The good news is, it’s finally starting to happen.”
Senator Sullivan’s full statement is here. https://www.sullivan.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/icymi-sullivan-discusses-alaskas-strategic-importance-and-military-build-up-at-aspen-security-forum .
If that is indeed what is starting to happen, then the real question Alaskans need to be asking themselves, their families and loved ones, theirs friends, neighbors, colleagues, cohorts and compeers is: Is that “good news” about a good thing for Alaska and Alaskans? And if it is not, then what is the alternative?
One alternative is Alaska Sovereignty.