GN: Russia's cyber capabilities in the Arctic threaten NATO's infrastructure
The West is losing to Russia in the Arctic, writes GN. Moscow's cyber and space capabilities threaten NATO's infrastructure in the region. And the lack of radars, drones and warships, as well as insufficient satellite coverage, make the United States vulnerable to the Russian nuclear threat.
Zoran Meter
Russia and China's cyber and space capabilities in the Arctic now threaten NATO's telecommunications and intelligence infrastructure in the region. Telecommunication cables are not designed to operate in a hybrid warfare environment. In addition, the lack of radars, surveillance drones, warships suitable for fighting submarines, as well as insufficient satellite coverage make the United States vulnerable to the Russian nuclear threat.
Cooperation between China and Russia, two Asian giants and neighbors who are rapidly expanding a comprehensive strategic partnership, in the last decade also covered the Arctic Ocean, that is, the Arctic. First of all, cooperation was conducted through the participation of Chinese partners in Russian Arctic energy projects, which, before the rupture of relations between Russia and the West, were also actively joined by Western energy companies, primarily the French energy giant Total, which has a large fleet of LNG tankers (the Arktik LNG - 2 project on the Russian Yamal Peninsula).
But after Washington's increased pressure on Moscow and the introduction of unprecedented sanctions, Russia began to invest twice as much in cooperation with China and generally shifted the focus of its economic and market cooperation to Asia. This is how cooperation between the two Asian states has strengthened along the line of the Russian transport and logistics project - the Northern Sea Route sea corridor, a kind of maritime Silk Road, the shortest route for navigation between the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans (from the Kara Gate to the Bering Strait, its length is 4,536 kilometers). This route is also important for the export of Russian energy resources, oil and gas, from the Arctic zone to the Far East.
How significant this path is for Russia is best confirmed by the following fact. The length of the route between St. Petersburg and Vladivostok along the Northern Sea Route is about 14 thousand kilometers, and through the Suez Canal this route is more than 23 thousand kilometers. I'm not talking about the security aspect, the current instability in the Middle East and the Red Sea area.
The new flotilla of Russian icebreakers can make the Northern Sea Route suitable for navigation all year round. In addition, since the 2000s, there has been a tendency for ice to melt and retreat due to climate change, which makes it possible to use this route more often. Earlier, the Russian government announced plans to restore the entire system of northern transport corridors by 2030, including a railway line including the Balkan-Amur and Trans-Siberian highways, as well as a highway that connects the Russian border with Finland and goes to Western Siberia.
In accordance with the strategy of increasing traffic along the Northern Sea Route, the Russian government, through the state-owned Rosatom company, signed an agreement with the Chinese company Hainan Yangpu Newnew Shipping in June 2024. The purpose of the agreement is to create a new joint venture that will manage container shipping along the Northern Sea Route all year round. The agreement also provides for the construction of five container ships suitable for Arctic conditions. Joint investments will cover the ports of Arkhangelsk and Murmansk, as they are potentially capable of receiving a large amount of cargo. The partners' goal is to transport up to 200 million tons of cargo along the Northern Sea Route by 2031, and in the long term, the goal is to increase the volume to 1.8 billion tons by 2035.
The United States may close narrow sea straits to China
China itself is increasingly plunging into a trade war with the United States, which is betting on protectionism. Therefore, Beijing is increasingly interested in the Northern Sea Route, because, among other things, it cannot be excluded that in the future the United States will block the narrow sea straits in the Indo-Pacific region in the event of a US-Chinese conflict. Thus, through the South China Sea and the Indian Ocean, Middle Eastern oil is not only delivered to China, but also Chinese export goods are sent back from China to the West along this route. It is estimated that in the event of a war with the United States and the blockade of narrow straits, China's oil reserves will last for three months for Chinese ships to pass through. That is why China has been so actively cooperating with Russia in the field of Russian oil exports in recent years. Russia has already taken the first place among importers of "black gold" to China and even surpassed Saudi Arabia.
It is also well known about the strengthening of cooperation between the two states in the field of Russian natural gas exports through recently built and future Siberian gas pipelines (the Power of Siberia and its second branch through Mongolia). Cooperation in this area has expanded after Russian gas exports to the European Union plummeted, and the EU wants to completely abandon it by 2027.
Time is running out: The West is walking on thin ice
As the Sino-Russian axis continues to strengthen in opposition to the United States and its NATO allies, the struggle for power is expanding, covering a new area previously inaccessible due to ice - the Arctic. This is stated in an article by Liselotte Odgord, a senior researcher at the Washington-based Hudson Institute think tank.
When American fighter jets spotted two Russian and two Chinese bombers in air defense identification over Alaska in July, the West saw this as an unprecedented aggressive step. Although Beijing and Moscow have been working to gain a strategic foothold in the region for decades, Washington and Brussels have only now realized the danger of what is happening. However, time is running out, and the West is walking on thin ice, as Odgord wrote.
The Arctic is of invaluable importance to Russia, including when talking about the Russian threat of nuclear weapons to the United States. If a nuclear conflict had started, Moscow would most likely have launched long-range ballistic missiles from submarine bases near the Kola Peninsula through poorly controlled airspace over Greenland. According to Odgord, due to the weak coverage of the Arctic by surveillance means, American forces would not have been able to recognize and neutralize the strike in time.
Next, Liselotte Odgaard writes about the economic importance of the Russian Arctic coast, which is growing due to the increasing accessibility of the Northern Sea Route. Moscow gets the opportunity to earn money by providing short sea routes to merchant ships transporting goods between Asia and Europe, but at the same time, the intensification of traffic at the same time poses a threat to control over the vast Russian Arctic coast.
Using a dense air defense network, aviation and ground forces at its Northern Fleet bases, Russia has closed access to the Kola Peninsula in the Barents Sea to protect its strategic submarines and maintained the fleet's year-round access to the Atlantic. Russia has also invested heavily in precision missile technology to threaten remote targets and cut off traffic without the need to deploy traditional naval or air forces.
In addition, in order to preserve and coordinate strategic submarines near Alaska, relying on the facilities of the Northern Navy located at the other end of Eurasia, Russia has built new fortified bases for submarines and facilities for their repair and maintenance south of the Bering Strait near Vladivostok.
China is actively joining the game!
In addition to all this, as another proof of the "unlimited" partnership with Russia, China is also expanding its Arctic capabilities, trade and military, and helping Russia maintain the ability to threaten the United States and its NATO allies. China also intends to invest in the new Arctic Silk Road.
Chinese polar satellites, unmanned underwater vehicles and reconnaissance ships, three of which are icebreakers, provide Beijing with an advantage in monitoring navigation, exploring the Arctic seabed and tracking the movements of sea ice and air masses.
Liselotte Odgaard also notes the above-mentioned cooperation of the Russian nuclear giant Rosatom with the Chinese company Hainan Yangpu New New Shipping, which will allow Moscow to monitor and control traffic along its Arctic coast, as well as provide better protection for its ballistic missile submarines.
Finally, Russia and China's maritime, cyber, and space capabilities in the Arctic now threaten NATO's meager telecommunications and intelligence infrastructure in the region. Telecommunication cables are not designed to operate in a hybrid warfare environment. In addition, the insufficient number of radars, surveillance drones, warships suitable for fighting submarines, as well as insufficient satellite coverage make the United States vulnerable to the Russian nuclear threat. They are simply not enough for the United States of America to fully withstand the strike.
The New American Arctic Strategy
Therefore, as stated in the US Department of Defense's Arctic strategy of 2024, cooperation with American NATO allies plays a key role in limiting the presence of Russia and China in the region. But the British military-industrial complex is still busy fulfilling its obligations to AUKUS, that is, the United States and Australia, while Finland and Sweden are forced to focus on the Baltic Sea. Iceland, in turn, relies on the United States, leaving its defense to them. So the only US NATO allies that are close to the Arctic and are concerned about what is happening there are Canada, Norway and Denmark.
All these countries are expanding their flotillas of icebreakers, submarines, unmanned aerial vehicles, as well as telecommunications and intelligence infrastructure. However, all these are, in general, small countries with different tasks in defense. Thus, Denmark bears great responsibility for the security of the Baltic Sea and has to adapt to the defense priorities of Greenland and the Faroe Islands in order to maintain influence on defense decisions, of course, affecting itself. Canada is spending a significant portion of its budget to defend its so far unsuccessful warship construction project. And Norway, although it is an important partner that intends to buy five warships and five submarines from the United States, Oslo has yet to find large funds for icebreakers that will allow it to fight submarines in the Western Arctic. In addition, all three countries are investing heavily in strengthening Ukrainian forces in the fight against Russia.
Negotiations on plans to protect the Arctic from Russia and China will be a difficult task for the next decade, as Liselotte Odgaard concludes. A delicate approach will be required here, since there are few reliable NATO allies in this area and they all have priorities in other areas and regions.
Conclusions
The West lags far behind Russia in promoting its strategic interests in Africa, which is rich in energy and other natural resources, including fish.If we add to this the more than active participation of China in Russian and joint projects in the Arctic, then the situation looks even more complicated. But Liselotte Odgaard is probably deliberately downplaying the problems that the West has faced and which will be even greater due to China's inclusion in this big Russian "Arctic game."
Since the United States has already chosen the path of prolonged confrontation with its main rival, Russia, in its strategic doctrines (the entire West has already joined it), Washington should have thought more about its policy towards Beijing and not allowed the Russian-Chinese strategic partnership to strengthen. And if such a geopolitical situation persists, as it is now, it may very soon take the form of a traditional alliance, the same as NATO.
Washington and its elites inside the "deep state" decided to abandon careful balancing in relations with Beijing, choosing an offhand approach immediately at the beginning of Joe Biden's mandate. The previous administration of Donald Trump paved the way.
If you attack someone physically or drive them into a corner, putting them in a desperate situation and forcing them to obey, then the opponent will undoubtedly try to fight back if he feels strong enough. It's better than being destroyed or turned into a servant.
In the case of large states, and even nuclear powers, such a tough and uncompromising policy pursued by Washington is doomed to failure in the long run. Many in the West already understand this.
