... relative economic importance of the Arctic region for North American nations is much more limited than for Eurasian powers.
Russian-Chinese Relations Today: Views from Moscow. RIAC Policy Brief
In conclusion, the ICE alliance has more geopolitical and geostrategic rationale than economic. The idea, apparently, is to confront Moscow in controlling the vast Eurasian Arctic maritime space. Not surprisingly, the new initiative was announced on the margins of the NATO Summit upon its 75th anniversary rather than at a G20 meeting or at the World Economic Forum.
The looming icebreaker race ...
... region. Russian development to this regard has already
started
and these would increase on the basis of security deployments of NATO in the due course.
This militarization would not only remain restricted to a particular region or area, but owning to Russia’s geopolitical and strategic capabilities in the Arctic, the region as a whole would witness increased in military buildups. The scale and intensity of NATO’s joint
exercises
in Finland post its accession to the alliance, would further aggravate insecurities in the region. Western arguments that justifies Finland’s joining of the NATO as a strengthening factor to the alliance’s strategic positioning ...
... of “denying Russia’s claims,” we see
the redoubling of efforts
to transfer the agenda of multilateral cooperation in the Arctic to exclusive platforms like
Nordic Plus
, where Moscow is not even invited.
The accession of Finland and Sweden to NATO apparently threatens Russia’s interests in the Arctic, given that the Alliance may one day deploy military assets in their territory, including strike capabilities. The mounting potential for conflict in the Arctic, due to a predictably higher intensity of air-force and naval operations conducted ...
... that there needs to be an Alliance response to Russian activities with a growing focus on the Greenland–Iceland–UK gap.
With new actors, including China, coming into the region, Russia is on the defensive. Responding to a question about whether Russia is prepared to talk to NATO about the Arctic and managing military tensions, it was noted that Russia is opposed to seeing more NATO engagement in the region, and security dialogue should be conducted among the five littoral states directly.
Conclusions
The workshop highlighted the importance ...
... side on its militarizing the Arctic is especially important because of the apparent asymmetric power relations between Russia in the Arctic and the other Arctic states. The holding of regular information-sharing sessions on military activities in the Arctic, regular NATO-Russia joint dialogues, as well as occasional NATO-Russia joint exercises in the Arctic could undoubtedly help reduce the tension.
... supporting services) and would facilitate negotiations with potential partners that need the NSR for their own purposes (first of all, China).
Return of the “Big Game”
Several publications in the West
have already referred
to the interaction between Russia and NATO in the Arctic as the “Big Game,” which brings up obvious associations with the historical rivalry between Russia and Great Britain in South and Central Asia in the 19th to early 20th centuries. This term probably fits the current conditions but must be interpreted ...
... a liberal multilateral approach, China is defending the interests of humanity from the selfish small group of Arctic states that includes Russia. For a mighty power with limited resources, however, this position serves the Chinese national interest.
Russia has no allies in the Arctic Council: all the other countries are founding members of the U.S.-led NATO. Nevertheless, Canada’s approach to the Northwest Passage is almost identical to the Russian position on the Northern Sea Route. Ottawa considers the straits between the islands in the north of Canada to be the country’s historical waters. Other ...
... 2018. The alliance continued to build up and strengthen its military activities in the Arctic by preparing forward airfields, modernizing sea ports and creating a system of prepositioned stockpiling. Provocative military activity was recorded close to Russian borders.
NATO started holding regularly military exercises in the Arctic. In 2018, the alliance
held its largest
ever drill in the north. 50,000 troops, 250 aircraft and 65 large surface ships from 31 states participated. The drill failed to have an intimidating and provocative effect, though. Moscow reacted rather ...
... Norway would ‘have to face head-on Russia and Russian military might’. A similar warning was issued in November 2011, when President Medvedev announced that to prevent nuclear war, Russia may have to launch a limited military strike to decapitate NATO’s missile defence components when the system reaches the maturity to neutralise Russian second-strike capabilities. Further tensions in the Arctic is also evident as Norway is accused of attempting to establish ‘absolute national jurisdiction’ over Svalbard and its shelf. In a breach of the Svalbard Treaty, Russian officials were banned access, while members of the NATO Parliamentary ...
... country." The situation brought Norway enormous investments from the NATO infrastructure programs, which were effectively used both for military and civilian purposes. Hence, Norway suffers damages from the North’s reduced importance for NATO after the collapse of the Soviet Union and would prefer to fuel controllable tensions with Russia in the Arctic.
Oslo has long found itself balancing between these often-mismatched interests, with the optimal scenario appearing to lie in free operation in the North, primarily in Spitsbergen and adjacent waters, or jointly with Russia, with overall support ...
