That's a great question. I was at a workshop in Boston when there were members from Gwich’in and also from the Sami, and they had some opinions on this that I'm happy to share.
That is obviously to the benefit of the Arctic Council, so there is concern from the indigenous side that, if you get rid of the Arctic Council, where will be the place that indigenous peoples are included to the level that they have been in the Arctic Council? In the status quo right now, it is not safe for Russian indigenous participants to speak out and to participate. The Sami and Gwich’in members remarked that they were not sure how they could approach or talk to their Russian colleagues without compromising their safety. I'm not sure what their Russian colleagues can say.
There are six permanent participants. Four of them have Russian participation. One of them is exclusively Russian, RAIPON, and they have come out in favour of the war in Ukraine. There isn't a lot of sympathy, I guess, to entertain RAIPON's inclusion, but with the other three current participants, that's a question that remains. That would be why I would favour having an A7, and it would be up to the indigenous permanent participants how they can maintain that collaboration with their Russian colleagues. That would be the reason you don't want to just get rid of all our Arctic Council or not have an A7, because everything would just kind of devolve into bilateral state institutions and not have that strong indigenous component.