This...
The truth about Arctic "strategic competition"
The region is far less important, and less contested, than commonly claimed.
Despite claims that climate change is transforming the Arctic into an arena of great-power competition, the region’s strategic fundamentals remain largely unchanged. Territorial disputes persist and are largely procedural, shipping and resource incentives are overstated, and US rhetoric on Greenland is strategically incoherent.
Several long-standing territorial disputes illustrate this dynamic. The North Pole itself is contested between Canada, Greenland/Denmark, and Russia, while the United States, alone among the eight Arctic States in not ratifying the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (
UNCLOS), maintains an unresolved maritime dispute with Canada in the Beaufort Sea. Canada and Denmark only settled a territorial dispute over
Hans Island in 2022.
Yet these disputes have not driven instability.
Governed by established legal frameworks and involving limited material stakes, the disputes over Arctic territory persist primarily because there is little urgency to resolve them. The fact that the Arctic Council has survived following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine owes less to any notion of Arctic exceptionalism than the region’s relative mundanity. Cooperation endures because the strategic payoff from confrontation remains low. Yet reports continue to claim, as if it is a matter of fact, that rising temperatures and receding ice will make the Arctic an arena for
increased competition.
Commercial behaviour offers a more reliable indicator of risk than strategic speculation. Shipping routes that are central to global trade tend to attract sustained investment and infrastructure development. Arctic routes exhibit neither of these characteristics. Transit remains seasonal and unpredictable, with even summer navigation subject to severe weather, limited search-and-rescue coverage, and
high insurance costs. As a result, shipping through the Arctic is best understood as supplementary rather than critical.
The region is far less important, and less contested, than commonly claimed.
www.lowyinstitute.org