Arctic Security Research Articles

The Pandemic, the Arctic and Me: A Levels of Analysis Discussion of Arctic Security Focusing on the 2020 Global Pandemic

The Covid-19 pandemic hit the world during the winter 2020. Still on-going, it impacts everyone’s everyday life on a great scale. While the pandemic is considered as a global challenge, it has particular effects in the Arctic due to local parameters, such as remoteness, need of communication, other health challenges, presence of indigenous communities, etc. Using the author’s personal experience as a starting point, this paper aims to provide a broad and objective analysis in order to identify and discuss major stakes of the pandemic as well as the opportunities it provides.

Space, scale, and global politics: Towards a critical approach to space in international relations

AbstractSpace matters for global politics but the treatment thereof in International Relations (IR) has been uneven. There is broad interest in spatial aspects across many research communities but only a nascent theoretical discussion and little cross-field communication. This article argues for a fuller engagement of IR scholars with sociospatial concepts and proposes a spatial approach to global politics based on four essential dimensions: a spatial ontology, the constructedness of space, a scalar perspective, and the interaction of materiality and ideas. As one possible way of integrating these aspects into a more specific concept, the article elaborates a framework of spatial practices and uses the example of Arctic Security research to illustrate the upsides of such a spatial approach for IR research.

Information and analytical support of the Arctic industrial-natural complexes safety

Recently, increased attention has been paid to issues of information and analytical support for the Russian Arctic security. However, risk management problems are especially acute for lower levels of management hierarchy. Therefore, it is relevant to consider issues of managing technogenic-ecological industrial-natural complexes safety of the Arctic. In this article, these features are considered on the example of a heat power plant. Accidents related to oil and oil products spills are considered as a typical example. In first part of the work, main goals and objectives of prevention, forecasting and elimination of accidents consequences are given, the features of operational management in event of an emergency are revealed. It is shown that Arctic industrial-natural complexes safety management is a complex interdisciplinary area of fundamental and applied research. The structure of information-analytical complex for risk management has been formed. The second section presents some research and developments in field of information-analytical support of industrial-natural safety. Directions for further research are outlined.

An Arctic security dilemma: assessing and mitigating the risk of unintended armed conflict in the High North

ABSTRACT After the Cold War, international relations in the Arctic were characterised by cooperation and diplomacy. However, since Russia's annexation of Crimea in 2014, largely peaceful relations in the High North have been endangered by growing military competition between Russia and Western Arctic powers. The lack of military to military dialogue between Russia and the West has exacerbated the situation. Consequently, an Arctic security dilemma has arisen, which threatens stability and increases the danger of unintended armed conflict resulting from accidents or misunderstandings. Security dilemmas are as old as international politics. They occur when states feel threatened by the expanding military capabilities of their neighbours even if there is no deliberate hostile intent. This article will examine the developing Arctic security dilemma and the chances of its mitigation. Two recent developments provide potential grounds for optimism. The new United States’ administration has pledged to return America to global engagement and multilateralism. In 2021, the Russian Federation is scheduled to become chair of the Arctic Council and the Arctic Coastguard Forum, the main intergovernmental institutions in the region. These events provide an opportunity to rebuild greater trust and confidence in relations between Russia and its Arctic neighbours and alleviate dangerous tensions.

Here there be dragons? Chinese submarine options in the Arctic

ABSTRACT In the wake of new academic and government attention paid to China’s growing Arctic security interests, this article examines the strategic advantages which may lead China to deploy submarines into the polar waters as well as the disadvantages and dangers inherent in such a mission. In contrast to the general belief that such an under-ice presence is both imminent and dangerous to the US and its allies, this piece suggests a more nuanced appreciation for the limited value of the Arctic as a realm of Sino-American competition.

A New (Cold) Front in Polar Intelligence? Trends and Implications of Technology-Enabled Monitoring in the Arctic

The Arctic has gained increasing attention from defense and intelligence policymakers concerned about great power conflict in the High North. United States-Russian competition in the region over polar shipping routes and natural resources seemingly contradicts institutional commitments to retain the Arctic as a “low tension zone.” Superpowers and their allies are receiving international condemnation for advancing kinetic military activity in the region while constituents and interest groups are instead advocating for diplomacy and cooperative restraint. As a result, Arctic nations are turning towards extensive reconnaissance and monitoring of the region to deter conflict. This study draws on strategy documents from each of the eight Arctic nations, scholarly research, and news coverage to assemble a picture of current efforts at technology-enabled monitoring. It also examines the potential of technologies such as long-range surveillance drones, satellites, and seabed monitors to facilitate near-constant reconnaissance by polar powers. The current deterrence mindset of Arctic security postures bears comparison with Cold War-era efforts to prevent outright conflict via monitoring and mitigation strategies. This study provides a historic account of Arctic intelligence in the 20th century and uses a comparative approach to assess what aspects of the contemporary situation are genuinely new and which may benefit from lessons of the Cold War. It concludes with policy recommendations for Arctic states to implement cohesive northern monitoring strategies into their intelligence organizations as well as long-term guidelines for new multilateral fora focused explicitly on Arctic security issues.

U.S. Arctic security strategies: balancing strategic and operational dimensions

ABSTRACT To date, the American Arctic approach is mostly geostrategically focused, to the exclusion of operational and tactical considerations. Moreover, the strategic components often work towards identifying and defining the problem while offering little in the way of solutions. As a result, Department of Defense (DOD) Arctic policies represent strategic thinking that is reflective of the national discourse, but lacking in doctrinal, Service-level or COCOM direction needed to establish operational and tactical guidance. Aside from the U.S. Coast Guard, DOD joint and service components – especially those with published Arctic policies – have had no national direction to do otherwise than to focus on geopolitical framing. In this article, we suggest that the United States should seek more balance between strategic imperatives and operational requirements and activities. This article begins with a discussion of the theory and doctrine addressing the relationship between the operational and strategic levels. We then survey relevant strategic documents from the U.S. government, seeking to find guidance that would inform both the American strategic approach to arctic security and any operational requirements that result from the strategic approach. Ultimately, we conclude that prioritisation of the Arctic will become apparent when and if the United States sends a demand signal vis-à-vis the National Security Strategy and subsequently establishes clear defence and fiscal mandates in support of stable, programmatic requirements towards operationally defined missions and capabilities.

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.

러시아의 북극 안보정책과 군사기지 구축의 함의

탈냉전기 북극지역은 중요성이 부각되면서 이용과 개발과정에서 지속가능한 미래 성장지역이자 여러 형태의 협력과 갈등이 상존하는 지역으로 부상하였다. 북극지역은 연안국가들 간 해양영토 획정문제와 대륙붕 확정문제, 북극항로의 자유로운 이용과 개방의 제약점과 북극을 ‘인류공동의 유산’으로 간주하는 비북극권 국가들의 접근과 주장 등이 현존한다. 북극 연안 국가들은 자국의 안보는 물론 경제적 이득을 위해 영해 확장 등을 통해 주권적 관할권과 통행권을 주장하고 있다. 이들 국가들 중 가장 적극적인 러시아는 북극 자원 탐사·항로 개척 등을 위해 원자력 쇄빙선 최대보유로 현재 46척을 운용 중이다. 블라디미르 푸틴(Vladimir Putin) 대통령은 북극자원 개발과 북극항로 개척을 위해 북극 인프라개발을 최우선 국정 과제로 간주하였다. 러시아의 북극 개발과 진출이 활발해지면서 군사안보에 대한 관심이 증대되었다. 이에 러시아의 북극에 대한 군사안보정책도 다양하게 발전해왔다. 푸틴 대통령은 2001년 7월 “러시아연방 해양전략 2020”을 채택하였고 러시아의 북극에서의 다양한 개발 및 군사안보 정책은 자국의 방어와 국가 이익에 있음을 명시하였다. 이를 기반으로 러시아는 북극 전담 4개의 특수부대를 창설하는 등 북극 군사기지 구축 및 현대화를 적극 추진 중이다. 이런 맥락 하에서 본고에서는 기존의 북극정책과 자원개발 등 관련한 다양한 선행연구들과 차별적으로 탈냉전기 러시아의 북극지역에 대한 군사안보정책의 특징과 군사기지의 현대화와 북극군의 역할 확대의 주된 이유와 함의에 대해 분석하였다.

Canada’s Arctic Offshore and Patrol Ships (AOPS): Their history and purpose

In 2020 the first Canadian Arctic and Offshore Patrol ship joined the Royal Canadian Navy (RCN), the first of six such vessels being built to sustain RCN operations in the country’s Arctic Archipelago. These ships were announced by Prime Minister Stephen Harper in 2007 and, since then, have been the subject of considerable debate. Unlike anything designed for the Navy before, the ships fit awkwardly into traditional warfighting, provision, patrol, or icebreaking roles, with the result being criticism of their speed, range, and armament – culminating in widespread disagreement over their purpose and utility. This disagreement stemmed in part from uncertainty over what Arctic maritime security really looked like, and what an appropriate response might be. From armed-icebreakers to whole-of-government support ships, the AOPS evolved in lockstep with Canada’s developing Arctic policy and the military’s understanding of its role in the North. Thirteen years on from the government’s official announcement of their construction, and with the first ship finally delivered, it is easier to look back at the AOPS development and the evolution of the Arctic security dynamic underpinning it. This article is a close examination of that programme: its origins and purpose and the capabilities that the ships now provide.

Arctic Security and Outer Space

Journalists often portray the Arctic and Space as rife with economic competition, contested territorial claims, and impending conflicts. In actuality, there is extensive and ongoing cooperation between Russia and Western states in both regions. A number of factors common to the Arctic and to Space contribute to this ongoing cooperation, including ‘complex interdependence’ and widely agreed rules of international law. This article focuses on three further common factors: the ‘cold, dark, and dangerous’ character of the regions; the absence of substantial ‘weaponisation’; and the relative ease with which information about military activities may be gathered in the Arctic and Space, for instance through Space-based technologies. The latter factor enables Arctic and Space-faring states to avoid classic ‘security dilemmas’.

More than Words: Securitization and Policymaking in the Canadian Arctic under Stephen Harper

ABSTRACT This analysis examines the actions taken by the government of Prime Minister Stephen Harper between 2006 and 2015 in drawing attention to Canada’s Arctic territory through the lens of securitization theory. This analysis focuses not only on the rhetorical attention that the Harper government paid to Arctic security, but also the difficulties encountered in translating a discursive securitization process into tangible policy outcomes. This analysis additionally focuses on how the Harper government’s securitization of the Canadian Arctic resonated in public opinion polling. This research has implications for connecting securitization research focusing more on the construction of speech-acts to second-order results in bureaucratic processes. By expanding on existing tenets of securitization theory, this analysis is a useful case study in understanding how national governments “sell” the idea of an Arctic security “problem” to their respective citizens.

Arctic and Military Security Issues of the Russian Federation

Arctic and Military Security Issues of the Russian Federation

Arctic Security Strategies and the North Atlantic States

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.

NATO and Arctic security: Challenges, Opportunities and Prospects

In this article, the authors analyse the current policy of the North Atlantic Alliance (NATO) in the Arctic . The article emphasises that the new challenges in the Arctic, related to climate change, the participation of non-Arctic states in the development of the territory and the growth of Russia’s military activity, have put before NATO the question of forming a task and official strategy . So far, member states have not reached consensus in this direction . The article identifies the main steps of the Alliance, which confirm the thesis about the growth of tension in the Far North . We identified the factors that may affect the prospects of the Alliance in the region . Taking into account the fact that the Arctic in contemporary circumstances has entered the global agenda of international politics, the authors conclude the growth of NATO activity, as evidenced by the practical steps of the organisation . Little attention has been paid to this in official documents, although the importance of cooperation in the region has already been stressed .

Arctic SAR and the “security dilemma”

This article explains how search and rescue (SAR) equipment and personnel can strengthen Canada’s Arctic security without contributing to a classic “security dilemma”—whereby a perceived military buildup by one state leads to a responsive buildup by another state, and so on into an arms race. This is because Arctic SAR involves dual-use assets that can fulfill most existing and reasonably foreseeable Arctic security roles as a secondary mission. Avoiding a security dilemma is key with regards to Canada–Russia relations. In the Arctic arena, Russia sees itself surrounded by North Atlantic Treaty Organization states during a period of considerable tension with those same states elsewhere in the world. Although most of the responsibility for that tension lies with Russia, it is still in Canada’s interest to avoid feeding Russia’s Arctic uncertainties and insecurities, since regional military buildups can cause instability and even conflict.

Arctic Security, Territory, Population: Canadian Sovereignty and the International

AbstractCanada's policies to assert and maintain sovereignty over the High Arctic illuminate both the analytical leverage and blind spots of Foucault's influential Security, Territory, Population (2007) schema for understanding modern governmentality. Governmental logics of security, sovereignty, and biopolitics are contemporaneous and concomitant. The Arctic case demonstrates clearly that the Canadian state messily uses whatever governmental tools are in its grasp to manage the Inuit and claim territorial sovereignty over the High North. But, the case of Canadian High Arctic policies also illustrates the limitations of Foucault's schema. First, the Security, Territory, Population framework has no theorization of the international. In this article I show the simultaneous implementation of Canadian security-, territorial-, and population-oriented policies over the High Arctic. Next, I present the international catalysts that prompt and condition these polices and their specifically settler-colonial tenor. Finally, in line with the Foucauldian imperative to support the “resurrection of subjugated knowledges” (Foucault 2003, 7), I conclude by offering some of the Inuit ways of resisting and reshaping these policies, proving how the Inuit shaped Canadian Arctic sovereignty as much as Canadian Arctic sovereignty policies shaped the Inuit.

Uluslararası Hukuk Çerçevesinden Arktik Güvenliği Politikalarının Analizi: Rusya ve ABD Örneği

Son yıllarda artan
 küresel ısınma ile beraber kuzey kutbunu kaplayan buz tabakası daha fazla
 erimeye başlamıştır. Eriyen tabaka deniz alanını daha kullanılabilir bir duruma
 getirmiş ve deniz tabanında yer alan hidrokarbonlara erişim daha kolay hâle
 gelmiştir. Bu iklimsel değişime bağlı olarak ülkelerin bu alan ile ilgili
 politikaları da ciddi anlamda değişime uğramıştır. Öyle ki, dünyanın belki de
 en zorlu yaşam koşullarına ev sahipliği yapan Arktik bölgesi ekonomik ve
 siyasal kazanımların odak noktası haline gelmiştir. Bölgenin uluslararası
 statüsü ve egemenlik alanları konusunda tartışmalar baş göstermiştir. Böylece
 Arktik O’na komşu olan ülkeler arasında çıkarların çatıştığı bir alana
 dönüşmüştür. Bu durum Rusya ve ABD’nin rekabet koşullarının değişmesine de
 neden olmuştur. Ayrıca Arktik, küresel ölçekte yaratmış olduğu etkileri ile
 birlikte düşünüldükçe, giderek sorunlu bir bölgeye dönüşmektedir. Bu sorunların
 çözümü için ise, uluslararası hukukun esas alınması ihtiyacı doğmaktadır. Bu
 çalışma, Rusya ve ABD’nin Uluslararası Hukuk çerçevesinden Arktik Bölgesi’ne yönelik
 güvenlik politikalarını analiz ederek, bu politikaların iki devlet üzerinde ne
 gibi siyasi, ekonomik ve sosyo-kültürel etkiler ortaya çıkardığını
 tartışmaktadır.

At Opposite Poles: Canada’s and Norway’s approaches to security in the Arctic

Canada and Norway are similar in many ways. They share a strong commitment to international law and humanitarian issues, consistently rank amongst the most developed countries in the world, and have aligned themselves with the United States on security matters. They are also two of the five Arctic coastal states that have most actively engaged in northern issues over the last decade. Yet, on the issue of security in the Arctic, their interests have historically differed. This difference came to the fore during the governments of Stephen Harper (2006–2015) and Jens Stoltenberg (2005–2013). This article compares the divergent approaches to security and national defence in Canada and Norway under the Harper and Stoltenberg governments. It asks what role traditional military concerns in the circumpolar region had for the two countries during the period, and how threat perceptions in Ottawa and Oslo shaped their respective Arctic policies. We argue that, to understand the contrasting approaches to Arctic security, two factors are key: (1) the inherent difference in the two countries’ approach to, and utilisation of, NATO as a defence alliance; and (2) a clear difference in the role the Arctic holds for security considerations in the two countries given their disparate geographic locations. Ultimately, we make the case that to understand the different approaches adopted by Canada and Norway during the period examined, the Arctic needs to be understood not as one uniform region, but instead as a series of sub-regions where the dominant security variable – Russia – is present to a greater or lesser degree.

The “Global Arctic” as a New Geopolitical Context and Method

ABSTRACTThe term "GlobalArctic" was officially launched at the 2014 Arctic Circle Assembly (see: www.globalarctic.org). The idea for this term was not conceived in a vacuum; rather it was the outcome of a critical analysis on the state of Arctic geopolitics and security in the era of globalization with complex and deeply interdependent ecological, economic, environmental, cultural, political, and societal processes. It is important to note that global impacts in the Arctic are nothing new, since the region has historically been a part of the international system. Further, the discourse of regionalism, “the Arctic as a distinctive region”, of the 1990s is no longer sufficient and does not explain the current state of Arctic geopolitics. This article argues that the term “global Arctic” is not a discourse, but a new research and teaching method, an analytical means to study and examine significant changes both in the Arctic region and globally, as well as the current more complex geopolitical context with deeper and more obvious interdependence.