I'll quickly answer the question.
I've had the benefit of attending two of the Inuit Circumpolar Conference meetings recently, one when they developed an Arctic sovereignty statement and one when they developed a natural resources....
Their concern is partly the one I've been expressing. Participation in the Arctic Council is fine, but if the Arctic Council is not having any say on how resource development is going to occur, and resource development is something that affects them directly, then that participation is not very fruitful. If matters are going to be dealt with by the Arctic coastal states acting independently of the Arctic Council, I think they have to make some provision for indigenous involvement and participation in that.
That can happen in a variety of ways. It's all very well to say it happens in the Arctic Council, but if the Arctic Five get together and agree among themselves and then present things as a fait accompli to the Arctic Council, that's not really involvement of the indigenous people.
There is a serious question about how they can be involved in decisions affecting the resources and affecting their livelihood more directly than just being permanent participants in the Arctic Council.