Abstract
The Arctic region’s smallest states and home-rule entities are clustered around the North European/ North Atlantic gateway. Small states in general are considered to need external ‘shelter’ from other states or institutions when faced with multi-functional security challenges beyond their own capacities. Arctic opening as a result of climate change will – even without conflict or excessive militarization – force local small actors to review their ‘hard’ security policies; will offer economic opportunities but also temptations and risks; and will create or aggravate various functional security challenges that demand multilateral cooperation. Case-by-case discussion of the various (groups of) small Northern actors reveals that their Arctic agendas vary subtly, and their preferred ‘shelter’ solutions sometimes not so subtly. Up to now, Arctic considerations have highlighted rather than overcoming variations in states’ basic stances vis-a-vis the obvious protectors: the us, nato and eu. However all small players close to the region agree on the value of ‘softer’ neighbourhood organizations like the Arctic Council, and are working to strengthen their own (broadly defined) security cooperation. The extra issue of independence arises for the Faroes, Greenland and Scotland. Despite all such complications, the overall value of having peace-minded small states engaged in the Arctic game probably outweighs the practical drawbacks.
Published Version
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