“The Table Is Ours”: Alaska Inuit push back on Arctic governance

On April 28, 2009, the Inuit Circumpolar Council delivered the first in what has become a series of formal statements grounded in the right to self-determination: the Circumpolar Inuit Declaration on Arctic Sovereignty.  The affirmation followed a jolt of political tension sparked, in part, by Russia planting a titanium flag on the seabed at the North Pole.  In response, five Arctic coastal states—the United States, Canada, Russia, Norway and Denmark—met to establish a shared framework for governing the region.  During those talks, the so-called “Arctic Five” advanced a state-centered approach to marine governance, but that excluded Indigenous representation. The ICC, feeling sidelined, convened its own summit soon after, coordinating a unified statement that became the Declaration. 
As the sea ice rapidly diminishes and commercial and military interests intensify, there remain critics who have long argued that Arctic governance is the domain of nation-states; not nonprofit organizations like the ICC. Yet for Inuit leaders, that view overlooks a more fundamental reality: their presence—and authority—which predates the states themselves.  It’s a fact the ICC draws upon to assert Inuit self-determination, on their ancestral homelands, and in international forums, from the Arctic Council to the United Nations. 
“There are times we have to continue to repeat that—our sovereign rights,” said ICC Alaska President Marie Kasaŋnaaluk Greene, in a recent interview.  “And so, you’ve got to continue to repeat it. We’ve got to be firm about our self-determined rights.” 
At the time of the Arctic Five meeting, Greene, who is Inupiaq from Deering, was president of the NANA Corporation, the Alaska Native regional company driving economic interests for Inupiat villagers in the Northwest Arctic. She was officially elected president of ICC Alaska in August 2022. 
When she took the helm of ICC Alaska, the Biden administration had just released its 2022 U.S. National Strategy for the Arctic Region, which, according to Greene, did not meaningfully include the ICC. “So it led to, ‘Let’s do our own Arctic strategy,’” Greene said. 
Akin to how the ICC responded to the Arctic Five years earlier, the ICC Alaska Board of Directors held a summit with leaders from across four key regions–the North Slope, Northwest Arctic, Bering Strait, and the Yukon-Kuskokwim Delta. The goal was to define a shared vision that later became “A Statement to the World for the Arctic We Want.” 
On April 15, at the annual Arctic Encounter Summit in Anchorage, the ICC Alaska and its member organizations released the first-ever Alaskan Inuit Arctic Strategy outlining five thematic priorities that shift Arctic policy from a nation-state driven model to one rooted in Inuit sovereignty and human rights. 
“Our strategy makes it clear that the Arctic is not a place to be secured, developed or managed by those outside our region,” said ICC President Greene, reading prepared remarks from the summit stage. “It affirms that the future of the Arctic must be shaped by Inuit governance and Inuit Indigenous knowledge.”
Greene is no stranger to the ICC.  Before her current role, she served as an Alaska delegate and member of the ICC Board of Directors.  She even represented the organization as far back as June 2010, delivering an address at that year’s ICC General Assembly in Nuuk, Greenland on “Responsible Resource Development.”  That afternoon, she began her remarks in Inupiaq before a global audience of Elders, diplomats and fellow Inuit, framing extraction on Native lands as a “means to an end” approach for Inupiat villagers faced with high energy costs, expensive grocery bills and off-the-road travel budgets. “It is one tool we use to create a local economy that allows our people an opportunity to create a better tomorrow for themselves and for future generations,” she said back then. 
In July, Greene will return to the ICC General Assembly for its 15th session, this time in Iqaluit, Nunavut, Canada. The gathering will help kickstart the marking of a major milestone as the organization prepares for its 50th anniversary next year.  Founded in Utqiaġvik in 1977 under the leadership of Eben Hopson, the Alaskan Inuit Arctic Strategy couldn’t be better timed. 
As Arctic competition — for resources, military presence and shipping lanes— intensifies, tensions across Inuit Nunaat, the Inuit homeland spanning the United States, Russia, Canada, and Greenland, the ICC Alaskan Strategy speaks directly to some of the region’s most pressing issues, from extraction and climate change to marine governance and food sovereignty.
In many ways, the five priorities outlined in the framework are likely to drive the ICC General Assembly’s final declaration which serves as a blueprint for the entire Inuit circumpolar region over the next four years.  In doing so, the Alaskan Strategy makes one point clear: the Inuit will not bear the burden of development or conservation efforts by outside groups. 
“Not only do we expect to have a seat at the table,” said Greene, echoing a line from the Strategy.  “The table is ours.” 
Some of the most consequential statements in the Alaskan Inuit Arctic Strategy are spelled out across its five core priorities: 
Inuit-Led Development and Conservation: Demands that all projects on ancestral lands, including military and infrastructure, be led by or partnered with Inuit to ensure tangible community benefits.
Climate Change Impacts: Prioritizes local resilience by centering Inuit knowledge in the creation of adaptation strategies to mitigate the rapid environmental shifts in the Arctic.
Marine Governance: Asserts a “paradigm shift” where Inuit are recognized as rights-holders and decision-makers in global shipping and ocean management rather than mere stakeholders.
Food Security and Sovereignty: Protects the inherent right of Inuit to manage their traditional food systems, framing access to natural resources as essential to cultural survival.
Inuit Wellbeing: Targets holistic health by demanding funding for Inuit-led systems of public safety, education and housing that reflect indigenous-defined models of care.