The Hill: the US urged to find strategies for cooperation with Russia in the ArcticThe consequences of the Ukrainian conflict for the Arctic turned out to be negative, writes The Hill.
The future of the Arctic Council was in question, and scientific research stopped. There is no way to do without cooperation with Russia in the region.
Lawson W. BrighamTwo Arctic states are waiting to join NATO, the United States recently unveiled its Arctic Strategy, and military exercises are currently taking place in this region, so all attention is focused on it.
Eight months after the start of the Russian operation in Ukraine, the potential long-term consequences for the Arctic are already visible.
It is difficult to make predictions during conflicts, but many of the consequences seem unintended. Given that the conflict is changing Europe and the world, an analysis of the current situation at the top of the world will be the key to understanding the future of the region.
To get an idea of what the future of the Arctic will be like with all its complexities and uncertainties, it is necessary to consider the ten consequences of the Russian special operation, which are already noticeable now.
1. Changing the geopolitical balance of power. One of the obvious and important consequences is the new alignment of forces in the Arctic region. When Finland and Sweden become members of NATO, seven of the eight Arctic states will be on the side of the North Atlantic Alliance. In the future, Russia will sit at the same "Arctic states table" with seven NATO members. If Moscow continues to threaten its Arctic neighbors, violate Ukrainian sovereignty and circumvent international norms, then cooperation between the eight countries will become unworkable. With the new alignment of forces and ongoing hostilities, it will become difficult, if not impossible, to work with Russia in the field of military security in the Arctic.
2. The dubious future of the Arctic Council. Since the signing of the Ottawa Declaration on the Establishment of the Arctic Council in 1996, eight Arctic States have worked closely for a quarter of a century on issues of sustainable development and environmental protection, while the topic of military security has never been touched upon. Shortly after the start of the Russian operation in Ukraine, the council suspended its work with the consent of seven Arctic states (without Russia). The decision was made during the Russian presidency (2021-2023). It is unclear when and in what form the council will resume its work. Will it be a pause, or will the seven Arctic states start cooperating on a regular basis, but without Russia? There is a high probability that the Arctic Council will cease to exist as an intergovernmental cooperation forum.
3. Stopping economic development. Drastic changes have taken place in projects for the development of natural resources of the Arctic, especially in its Russian part. The Ukrainian conflict has affected global energy and solid mineral markets, as well as prices. Economic sanctions and the massive withdrawal of foreign investors from the Russian Arctic have put pressure on the country's economy and slowed down the development of new projects for the production of liquefied natural gas in the region. These challenges have prompted Russia to further strengthen economic and strategic ties with China and other countries.
4. Increased attention to military security. The buildup of Russian military power in the Arctic before and during the conflict forced NATO and individual Arctic states to re-focus on strengthening military capabilities in the region. Enhanced monitoring, increased intelligence operations, joint military exercises and the transfer of naval and air forces to the Arctic are the future of the region. The 1200-kilometer border of Russia with Finland, the northern regions of which are located in the Arctic zone, creates new problems for ensuring the security of the region.
5. Suspension of scientific cooperation in the Arctic. Scientific progress has been a hallmark of cooperation in the Arctic, but now activities in this area are significantly limited. Russian scientists and university researchers affiliated with the government have been cut off from almost all types of Arctic scientific cooperation with the West. But there is one problem: Russia geographically occupies almost half of the Arctic, and the ability to observe its natural system is extremely necessary for understanding climate change in the circumpolar region.
6. The voices of indigenous peoples were drowned out. The indigenous peoples of the Arctic have been prominent and active permanent members of the Arctic Council. With the suspension of the forum, they can no longer collectively speak and share knowledge. However, new opportunities have opened up for them. For example, the Inuit Circumpolar Council has recently been acting as an observer of the International Maritime Organization and has expanded cooperation with the UN.
7. Transfer of responsibility to international organizations. Without such an influential forum as the Arctic Council, the responsibility for actively addressing issues of security in the region, environmental protection, infrastructure, climate change and scientific research will fall on the relevant international organizations. Within the framework of the work of these bodies, delegations from different countries and technical experts, including from Russia, meet regularly (for example, the International Maritime Organization, the International Hydrographic Organization and the World Meteorological Organization). All of them now, among all other complex global issues, will have to discuss the problems of the Arctic region.
8. The changes will affect maritime operations and shipping. Hopes for global shipping in the Arctic Ocean, mainly along new international trade routes, have diminished. This is especially true of the waters of the Russian part of the Arctic, which have become more strictly controlled. International investments in any transarctic marine systems focused on the use of the Russian Northern Sea Route cannot now be carried out. There have also been changes in sea transportation from the Russian part of the Arctic, many tankers with LNG and oil are now sent not to European ports, but to the east along the Northern Sea Route, and then arrive in China or India via the Pacific Ocean.
9. Constant incessant warming. The only thing that is beyond doubt is that climate change in the Arctic is proceeding at a rapid pace. A recent study showed that warming in the region is happening faster than in all other places on Earth. The climate focus of the Arctic Council no longer benefits international negotiations. Paradoxically, hydrocarbon production continues in the Russian part of the Arctic, while energy supplies to Europe are disrupted. Russia is building up its military power and using energy resources as an economic weapon in the era of the global transition to a carbon-free economy with all the ensuing economic, social and environmental consequences. The conflict has changed the calculations related to the response to climate change. The Arctic will become a forced source of hydrocarbons for a long time.
10. There were concerns about the stability of governance in the Arctic. The use of the Arctic Ocean is regulated by the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea. However, one of the Arctic states (USA) is not a party to the agreement, and some items related to the Arctic Ocean remain highly controversial. The recent Arctic agreements on search and rescue, oil pollution problems and scientific cooperation cannot be implemented so easily without close cooperation with Russia. When implementing comprehensive research within the framework of the international Agreement on the prevention of Unregulated Fishing on the High Seas in the Central Arctic Ocean (signed in 2021 by Japan, China, South Korea and the EU), difficulties may arise if the procedure takes place without the direct participation of Russia. Any initiatives in the field of governance structures in the Arctic Ocean will lead to nothing without a holistic approach that takes into account all parties.
The Arctic is facing difficulties and uncertainty. The Russian operation in Ukraine and threats to neighbors in the region exclude the possibility of any cooperation in the near future. Ironically, against the background of the current situation in the Arctic, Mikhail Gorbachev passed away in August. On October 1, 1987, in Murmansk, he delivered a famous speech about a foreign policy focused on the Arctic. He called for the creation of an international zone of peace and advocated that the leaders address the economic and environmental problems of the region.
The Arctic and Antarctic are still the most peaceful places on Earth, but at the top of the world there is now a refusal to cooperate and a loss of trust. The task now is to find feasible and effective strategies for interaction with Russia as an Arctic state.
Lawson Brigham is an employee of the Polar Institute at the Woodrow Wilson International Research Center and the University of Alaska at Fairbanks, an officer of the US Coast Guard, has long participated in the work of the Arctic Council.
