Russia's strategy in the Arctic: cooperation, not confrontation

Staun, Jørgen

doi:10.1017/s0032247417000158

Cited by 22 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 32 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In general, Russian media illustrates the Arctic as an area of pragmatic relations between the EU and Russia rather than being a region of conflict and political rivalry. This supports previous findings of Russia being open to cooperate with foreign partners in the Arctic and pursuing a non-assertive foreign policy in that regard (Sergunin & Konyshev, 2014;Staun, 2017). The results of our scrutiny of how Russian media articles between 2008 and 2018 have represented the EU's Arctic engagement can be summarised in four core narratives: the EU as player, seeker, prohibitor and partner (see Fig.…”

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 88%

“…Thus, the region constitutes a 'uniqueand uniquely controversial -political and geographic component in Russia's foreign policy'a combination of committing to developing international (economic) cooperation on the one hand, and investments in militarization of the Russian North on the other hand, with a strong discourse of protecting its national interests in the Arctic (Baev, 2018, p. 408). And yet, the broader foreign policy discourse in the Arctic over the past decade has been guided by 'cooperation first arguments', despite the Ukrainian unrest of 2014 (Byers, 2017;Staun, 2017). This policy approach shifted noticeably after 2008, with a stronger Arctic narrative on building cooperation than previously (Klimenko, 2016, pp.…”

Section: The European Union Meeting Russia In the European North Andmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Has Russia heard about the European Union’s Arcticness? The EU’s Arctic steps as seen from Russia

Skripnikova

Raspotnik

2019

Polar Record

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

AbstractEver since 2007/2008, the European Union (EU) and its various institutional actors have been developing a dedicated EU Arctic policy, setting common positions, stressing the EU’s Arctic credentials and prominently expressing its own “Arcticness”. These Arctic steps have been thoroughly scrutinised over the past decade. Yet, research has almost ignored one particular pillar of the EU’s Arctic endeavour: the “Arctic exception” in EU–Russia relations and the related lack of a distinct Russian dimension in the EU’s Arctic policy. Similarly, little is known of how the Russian side views the EU’s Arctic policy steps taken since 2008. The extensive transdisciplinary literature on EU–Russia relations has basically ignored how the EU has been represented in Russia ever since 1991. This article examines EU and Russian Arctic policies and their relations in the European North. In attempting to explore how the EU’s “Arcticness” has been presented, narrated and perceived in Russian media between 2008 and 2018, we draw upon an analysis of articles published on various Russian media platforms during that period. The study identified four core narratives of the EU’s engagement in the Arctic: the EU as player, as seeker, as prohibitor and as partner. These narratives provide evidence of the “Arctic exception” in EU–Russia relations, as well as offering some related explanations.

show abstract

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 88%

Section: The European Union Meeting Russia In the European North Andmentioning

confidence: 99%

Has Russia heard about the European Union’s Arcticness? The EU’s Arctic steps as seen from Russia

Skripnikova

Raspotnik

2019

Polar Record

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Official articulations of Russian Arctic priorities cover a spectrum from hard-line patriotic discourse that talks of "winning" or "conquering" the Arctic, to that which emphasizes the shared benefits of treating the Arctic as a "territory of dialogue" and highlights "respect for international law," "negotiation," and "cooperation." 7 Justifications for military modernization programs reflect both streams, describing the need to defend the homeland from foreign adversaries and the importance of dual-use capabilities that enable a wide-range of soft security missions. Canada has also offered similar dual messaging.…”

Section: Threat Perceptionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Canada’s and Russia’s Security and Defence Strategies in the Arctic: A Comparative Analysis

Lackenbauer

Sergunin

2022

Arctic Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This comparative article reveals how the general focus of Canadian and Russian threat perceptions in the Arctic have shifted from a Cold War fixation on hard defence to accommodate soft security issues over the last three decades. Both countries now pay greater attention to threats and challenges stemming from climate change, security, and safety risks associated with resource development and increasingly accessible sea routes. Although concern about military conflict arising from Arctic disputes continues to frame some media discussions in both countries, most strategic analysts and academics have moved away from this line of argument. Instead, military functions now include assertion of Canadian and Russian sovereignty over their respective internal waters, as well as protection of resources in their exclusive economic zones and on and in extended continental shelves; protection of economic interests in the North, including mineral and bio-resources; prevention of potential terrorist attacks against critical industrial and state infrastructure; and dual-use functions, such as search and rescue operations, surveillance of air and maritime spaces, support to safe navigation, and mitigation of natural and human-made catastrophes. The authors argue that analysts should parse two forms of military modernization in the Arctic: one of capability development related to the global strategic balance, where the Arctic serves as a bastion or a thoroughfare; and a second intended to address emerging non-traditional security challenges. They contend that these modernization programs do not inherently upset the Arctic military balance and need not provoke a regional arms race.

show abstract

“…These two different dialogues within Russia are also elaborated on by , who addresses this domestic debate and concludes that while many Western countries seem to think Russia is a revanchist power, it is actually acting like a status-quo power following a long-term strategy. 26 American scholars also take a holistic view of analysing America and Russian actions in the Arctic. for example takes a broad view of the changing conditions of the Arctic -taking into account geopolitical tensions between Russia, the United States and China, as well as economic interests.…”

Section: Holistic Approachmentioning

confidence: 99%

Conceptualising the Arctic as a Zone of Conflict

Gricius

2021

CEJISS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Arctic has been conceptualised as a zone of geopolitical competition, an international zone of peace and the dreamlike realm for extractive industries. While states such as Russia and the United States have commenced a militarisation and nuclearisation of the Arctic, other Arctic states like Canada and Norway have mobilised support for Arctic cooperation. Due to changing geopolitical pressures, the desecuritisation of the Arctic in the late 1980s was not successful. This lack of attainment begs the question as to why today, the Arctic seems to be heating up faster than ever. This article aims to determine how the Arctic is conceptualised as a zone of conflict by the United States and Russia. In doing so, the article examines different analytical dimensions that play a role in this conceptualisation, including the changing natural environment, evolving historical context such as the changing power dynamics between countries, and domestic politics. These different framings of a securitised Arctic help to explain how and why security becomes involved in Arctic discourse. To do so, I draw upon discourses in target states and examine the extent to which these particular discourses are manifested in practice and build on critical geopolitics.

show abstract

Russia's strategy in the Arctic: cooperation, not confrontation

Cited by 22 publications

References 32 publications

Has Russia heard about the European Union’s Arcticness? The EU’s Arctic steps as seen from Russia

Has Russia heard about the European Union’s Arcticness? The EU’s Arctic steps as seen from Russia

Canada’s and Russia’s Security and Defence Strategies in the Arctic: A Comparative Analysis

Conceptualising the Arctic as a Zone of Conflict

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About