The Arctic security region: misconceptions and contradictions

Abstract

The security interests of Arctic states are increasingly described as intertwined. The Arctic is seen either as a region where great power rivalries or resource wars are likely, or as a part of the world defined by cooperative traits and shared security interests. These depictions often implicitly lean on notions of a security region and regionalism, albeit without utilizing such frameworks to unpack security interactions in the Arctic. An increasing number of Arctic-focused scholars refer to the Arctic as a region in terms of security interests, but is this really the case if we make use of the different ways a security region has been outlined as an analytical tool? Leaning on different levels of analysis, this article questions several assumptions underpinning recent work on military security in the Arctic, advancing our understanding of security dynamics in the north and adding to our knowledge of security regions as a concept within international studies. It is argued that descriptions of the Arctic as a new security region are based on mixing and equating two distinct features of the region: the changing climate and related increases in economic ventures; and Russia's military build-up and regional hegemony.

Tall Tales from the High North: Contested Discourses of the Arctic as a Political Space

“…Realism-driven research as well as contemporary policy work tend to highlight the Arctic's return to geopolitics (Rumer, Sokolsky, and Stronski 2021; Dams and van Schaik 2019;Borgerson 2008). Others highlight the level of cooperation existing despite lacking overarching management institutions, incomplete maritime boundaries, frequent military exercises, and growing interest in the region's economic potential (Østhagen 2021;Neumann 1994;Brosnan, Leschine, and Miles 2011;Young 2009).…”

Foreword: Rising temperatures

“…Within the discipline of International Relations, the Arctic has attracted limited attention (Knecht & Laubenstein, 2020). When scholars in the field of International Relations have engaged, there has been a privileging of the agency of states in Polar politics with analytical attention brought to bear on what and how states such as the USA, Russia, and China define and pursue their interests (for recent examples, see Huebert, 2019; Pincus, 2020; Østhagen, 2021). Many of us still study and ask what Russian remilitarisation or modernisation might mean in terms of its ambitions to control parts of the Arctic and even of the Eastern Atlantic.…”