On 18 February, the Institute for the USA and Canadian Studies Russian Academy of Sciences in Moscow hosted an international scientific conference. The event focused on the role of Arctic affairs in modern world politics, and was attended by leading researchers in the field of foreign policy, foreign economic activity and security policy of Arctic countries, as well as the maritime and climate policy of India and China. The event attracted significant interest from those seeking to explore potential avenues for trade, humanitarian and scientific cooperation with Russia in the Arctic region.
The conference coincided with the Russian-American summit in Riyadh, the first dialogue between Russian and American delegations in a long time, which is believed to give impetus to initiating dialogue between the countries, and also lead to a possible settlement of the conflict in Ukraine.
The conference demonstrated that the role of the Arctic in the foreign policy strategies of countries is undergoing a shift, driven by the emerging economic opportunities, the priorities of industries and business, and the alignment of political and military forces in the region. As for the Russian Federation, the Arctic poses both challenges and opportunities. Firstly, there is pressure from Western countries at the micro or even nano level, as evidenced by the application of sanctions to the shipping industry and to specific vessels operating in the Arctic seas. The opportunities are primarily associated with Russia's attempts to develop mutually beneficial cooperation with non-Arctic states, mainly India and China.
It cannot be denied that despite the negligible proportion of the economy of the only American Arctic state, Alaska, in the U.S. GDP (less than one percent) and the country does not possess sufficient icebreaking capabilities and technologies to operate in Arctic conditions, the D. Trump administration is seeking to expand its influence in the Arctic region to achieve measurable results.
In light of these considerations, will the U.S. and Russia have points of rapprochement in the Arctic? Or whether efforts to initiate dialogue between Russia and the West are being used to cover up Western actions as a form of unfair competition, including the curtailment of Russia's economic activities in the region?
Russia still lacks a clear understanding of how to build cooperation with non-Arctic countries in the High North, challenges exist at the institutional level and in practice. Meanwhile, specific actions and decisions are already required, such as how the Russian authorities intend to create more favourable conditions for conducting business, overcome the risks of secondary sanctions, promote applied projects with sufficient funding, and, in general, develop approaches to cooperation that are not driven by "forced necessity" for Russia, but for the long term.
With the right level of expertise, development of scientific ties and political lobbying, there is a strong possibility that cooperation in the Arctic will expand Russia's technological boundaries and give an access to new markets. However, Russian experts have concluded that the situation will not become any easier under Trump. There are still risks of hidden U.S. sanctions for Russia, but this is a path to negotiation process, which generally corresponds to the American concept of economic renewal. Lobbying for a transpolar route may eventually allow the U.S. to shift the trade weight to an alternative route, bypassing the Russian Northern Sea Route, and thereby strengthen its economic sovereignty.
Without reference to some conclusions and assumptions expressed about what to expect from the Arctic Council - the outgoing Norwegians and the Danes coming to replace them - more realistic and balanced seem assessments of the military, political and economic aspects of relations between Russia, the U.S. and NATO in the expanded Baltic-Arctic region. The region is currently regarded as a potential strategic corridor, a new Fulda Gap, given its historical significance as a dividing line between the Warsaw Pact and NATO. Additionally, there is an acknowledgement of missed opportunities in the field of Arctic research by Russia. In an effort to rectify this, Russia is now focusing its efforts on the field of special research, a sector that enabled Western countries to define and extend their maritime borders.
Geographically, Greenland is part of American military planning, and the Danes were aware of American activities there in the 1950s and 1960s, but decided not to get involved. According to Russian experts, the scale of today's activity is significantly smaller than in the mid-20th century. Neither 70 years ago nor today are there any legal obstacles. Greenlandic politicians, in pursuit of the dream of independence, simply fell into the trap of their own rhetoric.
While Greenland could be considered as a new position area for American anti-missile defense system, a more probable scenario would be to strengthen Greenland for anti-submarine defense. The deployment of anti-submarine forces could be completed within a few months. Anti-submarine aircraft pose a threat to Russian operations in the North Atlantic and to Russia's sea-based strategic nuclear forces in the north.
It is well-documented that the U.S. has expressed concerns regarding Denmark's relatively low investment in Arctic defense. In addition to its own defensive and economic objectives, it may be suggested that the U.S. is seeking to turn the Arctic into an "aquarium" where they could observe Russian activities.
Ekaterina Serova
Also read the publication:
Icelandic Authorities Unable To Solve Worsening School Violence
