Abstract

Abstract After February 2022, it seemed that a breakdown of political, economic and scientific cooperation in the Arctic would be one of the many examples of collateral damage from Russia's war of aggression in Ukraine. Two years on from the invasion, however, the Arctic 7 (the United States, Canada and the Nordic countries) have renewed their engagement with Russia on polar issues. The Arctic Council has emerged as the exceptional case of a regional body in which Russia and NATO nations continue to collaborate, albeit at a more limited level through the working groups. This article examines the dilemmas facing the Arctic 7 as they seek to balance a values-based policy and strong stance against Russia in solidarity with Ukraine, with a desire to ensure the continuing survival of the Arctic Council and its primacy in regional governance. We argue that Russia has sought to weaponize the Council—withholding vital climate data and threatening to bring China further into regional politics—as part of a wider strategy of coercive diplomacy and hybrid threats in the Arctic. The Arctic 7 should recognize that they ultimately stand to lose more from giving into Russian tactics than from freezing Moscow out of the Arctic Council while the war in Ukraine continues.

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.