Arctic Security Strategies and the North Atlantic States

Abstract

New uncertainties in international relations have presented several states in the West with important choices regarding their national strategies for the Arctic. This article analyzes security challenges in the Arctic and North Atlantic region, as understood by some key North-Atlantic states, namely: the USA, Canada, Denmark, Norway, the UK, Germany and France. By analyzing how, or to what degree, the colder east-west security landscape since 2014 is reflected in these selected North Atlantic states’ Arctic security strategies, this article seeks to improve our understanding of how the security situation in the northernmost part of the world is developing and being understood. Through applying a traditional understanding of security, the article identifies similarities but also significant differences among the Arctic and North-Atlantic states. Most notable when comparing the strategies is the rather unique global perspective laid out in the US security strategy for the region. The British, Norwegian, Danish and Canadian perspectives, on the other hand, stand out as more regional in nature. Germany displays a rather low profile in its approach to international security in the Arctic, considering its economic status in Europe. France reveals a strong concern for Arctic shipping and freedom of navigation, a perspective similar to the USA’s, but with less global ambition.

Multidisciplinary perspectives on living marine resources in the Arctic

“…Jurisdictional issues in the Arctic are largely settled, and most of the Arctic Ocean is under the jurisdiction of its five coastal states. Competing economic and political interests and security-related and legal disputes, however, are latent (Bertelsen 2018;Wegge 2020).…”

Exponential Growth and New Agendas – a Comprehensive Review of the Arctic Conference Sphere

“…57 Russia's actions sparked discussions about the future of Arctic governance, 58 intensified diplomatic efforts (such as the Ilulissat Declaration), and renewed attention to national military capacity in the region. 59,60 With changes in the political climate came changes in the Arctic conference sphere, and conferences increasingly became arenas aimed at bringing science into the policy and decision-making processes. Conferences also became more interdisciplinary, as different issue areas became increasingly interlinked, and cross-sectoral, as the need for information exchange and communication among various stakeholders became more pressing.…”

“…69 With China's interest in investing in infrastructure and other projects in the region, particularly on Greenland, the United States became a more engaged Arctic actor. 70 Relatedly, with the remilitarization of the Russian Arctic coast 71 and growing interest of China, the European Union sought to expand its involvement in the region. 72 The Arctic Circle has increasingly become an arena for geopolitical games to unfold, and through the organization, non-Arctic states are provided the opportunity to host Forums to promote their engagement in the Arctic.…”

Арктическая Повестка Во Внутриполитическом Дискурсе Современной Германии

“…Германская доктрина в первую очередь отражает позиции страны как одного из мировых флагманов полярных исследований и отчасти мировой торговли, что отражается в её фокусе главным образом на проблемах экологии, международного морского права и науки. Тем не менее, обращает на себя внимание и готовность ФРГ «нести ответственность» в таких сферах, как военная безопасность, морские перевозки, производства продуктов питания, освоение ресурсов и экономическое развитие [35].…”