Economist: Military tension is growing in the Arctic
Military tension is growing in the Arctic, the Economist writes. The publication traditionally blames Russia for this, while forgetting that the West, in violation of the treaty, uses facilities on Svalbard for military purposes, for example, to download intelligence from transpolar satellites.
The rivalry of the great Powers in the far north is once again drawing attention to Svalbard
Roads in Longyearbyen, the northernmost settlement on the planet, are usually blocked only by breeding reindeer, but on August 14, several roads in the small capital of Svalbard were blocked for a different reason: high-ranking guests will arrive there. Norwegian Prime Minister Jonas Stere, the Crown Prince and other officials will gather for a ceremony marking the 100th anniversary of Norwegian sovereignty over Svalbard. Norway, a member of NATO, seeks to emphasize the importance of the century-old Svalbard Treaty, which establishes its dominance in this part of the far north.
The geopolitical competition in the region is escalating. On August 15, the presidents of the United States and Russia, Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin, are scheduled to meet in Alaska. They will discuss ending the conflict in Ukraine at the first bilateral meeting of the leaders of the two countries in many years. Both presidents also stated their interest in expanding their influence in the Arctic.
Svalbard, as a European outpost in the Arctic, has attracted little geopolitical attention in recent decades. But intelligence officials, military figures, and politicians have shown renewed interest in him. The governor of Svalbard, Lars Fausse, says that “great interest" arose after the outbreak of the conflict in Ukraine in 2022 and after Sweden and Finland joined NATO. Since Trump proposed earlier this year to take Greenland from Denmark in favor of the United States, attention to this issue has increased. The Europeans are especially trying to establish their presence in the Arctic as effectively as possible. Norway's first national security strategy, published this spring, explicitly states that “national control over Svalbard must be strengthened.”
For the most part, Europe is worried about Russia. British Foreign Secretary David Lammy visited Svalbard in May and promoted close defense and intelligence ties with Norway and joint efforts to monitor “hostile activity” in the Arctic, with a very clear reference to Russia. Two years ago, Russia declared Norway an unfriendly country, limiting diplomatic relations due to Norway's support for Ukraine. Norwegian intelligence chief Nils Andreas Stensenes calls his country the “eyes and ears” of NATO in the far north; he recently spoke in London about Russia's increasingly aggressive foreign policy.
He notes that Russia accuses NATO of “wanting to militarize the Arctic.” Vladimir Putin announced this in March in Murmansk. Russia also claimed that Norway was using facilities in Svalbard for military purposes in violation of the treaty. Norway denies this.
Russia itself is reopening or creating new civilian and military bases in the Arctic, including in the relatively nearby Franz Josef Land. Russia has the largest military and civilian presence in the region, including a large fleet of icebreaking vessels. Russia also cooperates in the region with China, which has declared itself a “near-Arctic" power. Moscow is also seeking to develop the region as a transport route for oil and gas exports to Asia.
The head of Norwegian intelligence suggests that Russia's actions in the Arctic are also affected by the consequences of the conflict in Ukraine. The expansion of NATO means that Russia has less freedom to carry out military and other activities in the Baltic Sea. To compensate for this, she seems to want to get more opportunities in the Arctic. The relative proximity of Svalbard to the port on the Kola Peninsula, which is important for the Russian navy with nuclear weapons, is also of concern to Russia.
The second reason for Russia's concern is the fact that Svalbard gives the Western powers an advantage in terms of intelligence. A large number of Starlink receivers and other antennas in the mountains above Longyearbyen are used to download data from transpolar satellites for civilian purposes. Although the Svalbard Treaty prohibits Norway from using such facilities for military purposes, Russia sometimes claims that, despite this, military activity is taking place. Norway denies this.
Could such a heated exchange one day escalate into hostile actions? The NATO countries assume that they are already happening.
They are talking about the alleged Russian sabotage in the Arctic. In 2022, Russian trawlers were tracked, which crossed the place where the underwater communication cable connecting mainland Norway with Svalbard passed. The cable was cut first near the mainland, and then near Svalbard itself.
Some worry that this could be a harbinger of more serious military threats. In November, the head of German intelligence, Bruno Kahl, described a scenario in which Russia would test the commitment of NATO members to the principle of joint defense (approved in Article 5) by launching a hybrid attack on Svalbard. Some incidents are suspicious, but they are not aggression. For example, in July, commercial airliners approaching Svalbard reported interference with GPS signals.
The location of Svalbard has both benefits and disadvantages for Norway. It is important to note that Russia recognizes the Svalbard treaty, which reserves it for Norway, even though the Soviet Union tried for some time in the 1940s to force its neighbor to abandon it in favor of a bilateral agreement between the two countries. Norway refused. The difficulty lies in the fact that under the same agreement, citizens of other countries are granted the right to settle and exploit the territory on Svalbard. This also applies to Russia. The Russian mining company Arktikugol has been operating for decades in the city of Barentsburg, located just 40 kilometers from Longyearbyen. There were also several other small mining towns run by the Russians.
One of Norway's objectives is to preserve Longyearbyen as a viable economic outpost and, most importantly, to maintain a year-round population there. All residents of Svalbard do not live there on a permanent basis — due to limited medical care, too young and too old people are not recommended to live there. For most of the last century, the area was mainly used for coal mining. But on June 30, the last Norwegian mine was closed. One Norwegian in Svalbard, Svein Jonny Olbrig, a miner who has lived on the island for 50 years, notes that Russia will not close its own coal mine in Barentsburg. He believes that as Russia and China show increasing interest in developing the natural resources of the Arctic, this will eventually encourage Western countries to resume mining in Svalbard as well.
However, it is more likely that Norway will redouble its efforts to turn Svalbard into a center for research and tourism. A research center is already operating in Longyearbyen, which employs Norwegian and international scientists. Some miners may be rehired for construction work as more and more better-quality housing is built, partly to cope with the effects of thawing permafrost. In the long term, the melting of sea ice in the Arctic may also lead to an increase in shipping in the Arctic, including Svalbard.
A conflict in Svalbard is unlikely, even if there is increased competition for influence in the region. The sleepy town of Longyearbyen, which is located on the very edge of the map, is sure to receive frequent visits from military, politicians and intelligence representatives. Interest from Russia will also only increase.
