
At the same time that some were celebrating BIW’s $4 billion dollar (and rising) Zumwalt destroyer, and others were protesting its cost and future missions, this writer was listening to National Public Radio’s Mary Louise Kelly tell the story of the Arktika, a billion dollar ship constructed in St. Petersburg, Russia. Although state funded, the Arktika is not a military ship. It is a nuclear powered ice cutter, reportedly the largest and most powerful ship of its kind, designed to cut through ice to clear shipping lanes for commercial vessels, and to help Russia extract oil and gas off its northern coast. Listening to the pride of its shipbuilders, I thought of my own neighbors in Bath. It is a remarkable feat to build such ships.
A Google search tells me that Bath, Maine and St. Petersburg, Russia are 3,974 miles apart. I am intrigued by the common efforts and pride the shipbuilders in these two cities just shared with their communities, and I can’t help but wonder what histories will be written as a result of the fruits of their labor.
The Arktika is preparing for a near future where the Arctic Ocean’s melting ice can be parted to make way for easier access to commerce and economic resources. Most of us understand that global warming is the significant reason for melting glaciers, and that burning fossil fuels is the most significant factor in creating global warming. Thus, it’s hard to imagine that there are power brokers posturing for future exploration in the Arctic for more fossil fuel extraction, but that is exactly the plan. Maine’s own Sen. Angus King is a leader in the drive to assure that the U.S. is present and competing (should we assume dominating?) for the oil and gas resources in the Arctic. We will be building our own ice cutting ships soon enough, perhaps even in Bath, Maine.
The Zumwalt destroyer’s future will find it parked in the Asia Pacific, where it will be a threat to China. It will be used to project U.S. force and dominance, which will be justified, as we are told over and over again, as a means to protect U.S. “interests and investments,” according the the United States Space Command Vision for 2020, published in 2000.
Russia could also be a target, if its shipping lanes and resource extraction were to be perceived as a competitor to U.S. corporate interests.
I am reminded of a newspaper quote I read by one of the demonstrators at the BIW christening, “I’m not sure how the destroyer addresses terrorism, exactly.” Somehow the script that we are “good guys” and our military machinery is needed to protect us from “bad guys” continues to justify massive expenditures for endless war. But for every “bad guy” killed, another is recruited. And significant numbers of good guys and innocents are killed in the process.
While the grand chess masters create geopolitical strategies to militarily dominate the world and its resources, I’m guessing that the interests of the shipbuilders in Bath and St. Petersburg have much more in common than not. I would offer that, for both communities, what’s important are strong families, good schools, accessible health care, caring neighborhoods, and a viable, secure future for their children’s children. I would argue that the future of both cities depends on a global effort to stop contributing to global warming, and to build a renewable energy infrastructure that allows for collective survival of the 21st century.
Perhaps it is the people who should be making these decisions, not the chess masters. Perhaps the old notion of getting to know each other is the best way to see that we are fellow citizens of this beautiful planet. Perhaps the shipbuilders and the children can discover our common ground. Perhaps Bath and St. Petersburg can become sister cities so that our children will never be strangers, never be “the other”.
May the Arktika never cross paths with the Zumwalt.
———
Mary Beth Sullivan is a social worker and a member of Peace- Works and lives in Bath.
Comments are not available on this story. Read more about why we allow commenting on some stories and not on others.
We believe it's important to offer commenting on certain stories as a benefit to our readers. At its best, our comments sections can be a productive platform for readers to engage with our journalism, offer thoughts on coverage and issues, and drive conversation in a respectful, solutions-based way. It's a form of open discourse that can be useful to our community, public officials, journalists and others.
We do not enable comments on everything — exceptions include most crime stories, and coverage involving personal tragedy or sensitive issues that invite personal attacks instead of thoughtful discussion.
You can read more here about our commenting policy and terms of use. More information is also found on our FAQs.
Show less