How Russia's invasion of Ukraine has changed the already rapidly shifting landscapes of the Arctic.

THE WILSON QUARTERLY

WQ Dispatch March 2022

– STEPHANIE BOWEN

In this WQ Dispatch, we take a look at how Russia's invasion of Ukraine has changed the already rapidly shifting landscapes of the Arctic.

The world has changed dramatically since we published our Arctic-focused issue, The New North, just several weeks ago. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has created immediate and long-term impacts that will be felt for years to come, including in the Arctic. As part of the Wilson Center’s Hindsight Up Front: Ukraine programming, the Polar Institute and the Norwegian Institute of International Affairs convened a group of leading Arctic experts for a widely attended event examining how recent events will play out in the Circumpolar North, long considered a region of low-tension and cooperation among allies and adversaries, until now. 

“In the past eighteen days you and I have witnessed the fabric of Arctic cooperation fraying because of the actions of one Arctic nation, outside of the Arctic region. But the implications of these actions have rippled through every facet of the Arctic,” said Mike Sfraga, Founding Director of the Polar Institute and Chair of the U.S. Arctic Research Commission, in his opening remarks.

The Polar Institute event featured notable Arctic experts and drew more than 750 registrants.

Evidence of that fraying came when the Arctic Council, which is made up of the eight Arctic States and Permanent Participants, and is currently chaired by Russia, took the unusual step of pausing operations. The seven other Arctic States – increasingly referred to as the Arctic Seven following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine – issued a joint statement condemning Russia’s actions. 

Commenting on that unanimous decision, James P. DeHart, U.S. Coordinator for the Arctic Region at the U.S. State Department, said Russia’s plummeting financial standing extended beyond the financial markets. “I think Russia’s standing in the Arctic has also been reduced to junk status. Because the Arctic is a region of strong rules and international law, a commitment to sovereignty, and territorial integrity. And when Russia violates those core principles so egregiously, not so far from the Arctic, how can it be otherwise that they lose standing everywhere?”

While Putin’s actions have resulted in almost universal condemnation, there are a lot of questions about what lies ahead for the Arctic, and its people. 

“What will Russia do next? In many ways it looks like when its back is against the wall that Mr. Putin will look very uncomfortably at all his relationships around the world. The sanctions create tremendous change and room for so many unintended consequences,” said Julie Kitka, President of the Alaska Federation of Natives. “We have concerns for the unknown, we have concerns for our people that use the waters, our whalers, our fishing fleets.” She went on to articulate several uncertainties around energy security, oil, and gas development, and more. 

“There is no defensible return to any kind of new normal, or even the post-2014 normal we had with Putin and Russia,” said Elana Wilson Rowe of the Norwegian Institute of International Affairs, who shared thoughts on how to move forward with Arctic diplomacy, inter-state relations, and other ongoing work into which Russia has been integrated. “There will be some mode in which this can go forward, this type of cooperation. And it’s also important to note that the like-minded Arctic states actually meet in quite a few different multi-lateral settings.”

There are some areas where continuing to work with Russia is in the best interests of Arctic nations, particularly in the oceans and along the coast, which is home to many of the Arctic Indigenous peoples. “Step back a moment, where can we actually work with the Russians and the Russian federation on practical, cross-border maritime operations? Those must continue, and they did during the Cold War,” said Lawson W. Brigham, speaking of the long coastal borders between Russia and Norway, and Russia and the United States. “These relationships surely should continue, at least in search and rescue, maybe response in some disaster situation. 

Tomas Ragina/Shutterstock

Increasingly, Arctic matters involve those outside of the Arctic. There is a growing interest in the Arctic by non-Arctic states, that are looking to be on the forefront of new economic, scientific, maritime, and other developments. And, while for now, Arctic governance appears stable, the recent fissure opens the possibility for others to find a way in.

“I want to be careful about anything that might deviate from the Arctic eight, which has been such a strong and very clear concept, really does open up the possibilities for clear arguments from states that want to argue that they should have a stronger role in the region. I’m specially talking about China,” said Marisol Maddox of the Polar Institute.

There is great interest in regional and global security in the Arctic, which involves those inside and outside of Arctic borders and is made even more urgent by recent events. “NATO at this moment does not have an Arctic strategy or clear Arctic policy, and its approach to the Arctic has been particularly cautious,” said Katarina Kertysova, Policy Fellow with the European Leadership Network and a Wilson Center Global Fellow. “Since 2014, there has been a growing pressure on NATO to rethink its strategic approach to the region, and I think over the past four to five years there really has been a visible shift.” All eyes will be on NATO, which is currently drafting its new strategic concept, which is expected to be approved at the NATO Summit in June. Kertysova says it will likely include more emphasis on defense and deterrence and its approach to Russia.

In summarizing the event, Ulf Sverdrup, Director of the Norwegian Institute of International Affairs, pointed to huge ripple effects in the Arctic’s geopolitical landscape, noting that while Putin’s war is not in the Arctic, the notion of the Arctic remaining a separate sphere is no longer valid. Sverdrup identified many remaining critical questions, “We are facing deep uncertainty. Uncertainty about of course, what will go on Ukraine. Uncertainty about what will happen to Russia, what will happen to Putin’s regime, and also, uncertainty about the strength of European unity.” 

One thing is clear: the rapidly shifting economic, security, geopolitical, and social Arctic landscapes explored in The New North, have changed more quickly than anticipated in unexpected ways, adding even more urgency to our need to better understand the Arctic of today. 

Wilson Quarterly Dispatch

March 2022