Geopolitics in the Arctic - Østhagen, May 2020

there. Ladies and gentlemen, my name is on the rail

system, and I'll be talking to you here today about

the geopolitics in the Arctic.

I just wouldn't use myself.

I'm a senior research fellow at the 50 off Johnson

Institute Research Institute, located just outside of Oslo, in the

home off former polar explorer fit of Johnson that deals

with, among many things, the Arctic and I've been working

on Arctic issues for its more than a decade now

in different locations around the world.

On Dhe.

That's what I will talk to you about today.

So how we can impact the complex situation that we

find in the Arctic, although spend, I guess the next

15 minutes or so talking about the good, the bad

and the ugly, as you can see here on my

left hand side a za way of distinguishing the different

dynamics that takes place in this part of the world,

which, unfortunately often are prone to temple one liners and

descriptions that don't really do justice to the complex dynamics

in this part of the world.

So let's just jump straight into it.

Um, if you followed the Arctic over the last decade,

or so even more so.

You probably noticed depictions such as this is from the

Economist more than a decade ago, highlighting this so called

scramble for the Arctic.

And that's been a common narrative about the Arctic in

media, among certain scholars, even some politicians that the Arctic,

because the ice is melting, is attracting more attention and

therefore also more prone to political disputes.

Military disputes which states or companies trying to grab resource

is or trying to to position themselves in the north

asked. This region is opening up on you've seen this

narrative re emerge again and again at different times over

the last 15 years.

In 2007 which the Russian planting off a flag at

the North Pole seabeds, which this cartoon This is also

depicting. Also later on, after 2014 that's here from The

Guardian, talking about military build up in the Arctic.

Um, more recently, National Geographic and others have talked about

this new Cold War in the Arctic.

Um, this is even the region newspaper article from earlier

this year, talking about how the melting off the Arctic

sea ice is leading to a power struggle at the

door step off normal.

But if you're interested in the different narratives and different

types of describing what is happening in the Arctic, there's

been a counter reaction to a lot of this discourse

and a lot of the media stories about the Arctic.

And it has predominantly come from scholars.

Some some politicians as well trying to nuance deserve it

and say I actually, if you look at the Arctic

region, it is surprisingly peaceful.

Why? Because the Arctic states themselves are interested in keeping

relations civil.

Having corporation to develop resource is to develop other types

off off infrastructure projects in the Arctic.

You actually need tohave corporation.

Beyond that, scholars have noted that actually, which regards to

the East West relations NATO, Russia, the in the Arctic,

they've been more or less insulated from events taking place

elsewhere. So in Arctic study is an Arctic narrative.

More generally, you've have this competing visions about the object

either is the son of corporation or as a region

that is imminent of conflict or is attracting conflict.

However, I would like instead to argue that this is

not really the complete picture, because in the Arctic as

any other part of the world.

You find dynamics both positive and negative, both conflict and

cooperation. And I mean, this is not something new, that

the world is complex.

But I think it's important to try to highlight or

to nuance the different complexities of what is taking place

in the Arctic.

So I borrowed from a rather famous Western Maria's.

You can see the good, the bad and the ugly

to try to simplify a bit some of the different

types off dynamics that we find in the region.

So looking at us, you could simply arrive simply divide

into a three level analysis.

It's rather common in in studies in international relations to

divide into levels off analysis.

Here I have, as you see here, international academic level,

the regional level meaning the Arctic, the Circumpolar on then

the bilateral level, as such which done becomes the good,

the bad and the ugly.

Andi, I'll show you a bit what I mean with

that. So first, let's jump to the good here.

Um, it describes the regional dynamics within the Arctic.

So, as I just said, one of the narratives concerning

the Arctic has been that the Arctic states are dependent

on corporation or on rather civil relations in order to

develop the region, as has been projected right, whether it's

resource is oil and gas shipping, as you see a

map of here search rescue that polos shipping roiling assets.

You see here the just a delineation often agreement on

search and rescue under the auspices of the Arctic Council

that was agreed between the Arctic states and also a

map concerning the oil and gas resources in the Arctic.

In the various companies, both Western and Russian, Andi, even

Chinese that operate within this domain point being.

There's no reason there's no ration now for conflict between

the Arctic States because they're much more interested in the

economic benefits off developing this region along the industries that

I've just highlighted.

And this is not only lead to, but it's even

being reinforced by the Arctic Council.

So the Arctic Council, being the most prominent regional body

that discusses Arctic issues, soft issues, no security but everything

else from sustainable development to, as I mentioned earlier, social

rescue to how to better improve the lives off communities.

Indigenous populations in the Arctic, a swell and not only

the Arctic states are part off the Arctic Council, more

and more countries are joining US observers as this map

highlights. Within the last decade, we've seen countries ranging from

India to China to Japan to Italy to France, all

joining US observers to the Arctic Council, showing that this

is the most prominent body regional body deal with these

issues in the Arctic in a cooperative manner, ergo relations

are relatively civil, relatively good.

However, that doesn't mean that you can also have negative

interactions in the Arctic.

And this is what has been increasingly talked about over

the last couple of years or so, and one example

that highlights this is the role that the Arctic held

during the Cold War.

So during the Cold War, the Arctic was important not

because of events in the Arctic.

The Arctic was more or less ice covered more so

than than today, but because it served as a buffer

zone between the two global superpowers the Soviet Union on

the U.

S. And the nickel countries that also where the allies

of the U.

S. The Arctic, in this context became above her sown

and became strategically important to have some forces there for

strategic purposes, but also as as the one of the

remains in the world where these two superpowers met.

But there were also being they held apart by by

saying that you next disability off the region itself, point

being that the Arctic was important not because of regional

dynamics, not because of resource is in the Arctic, but

because of its geographic location.

And this is what we've also seen emerge over the

last decades again, not in the same way as during

the Cold War, but it has some similarities on the

main driver of this is what this picture highlights.

Russian submarines or the Northern Fleet more generally located in

northwestern parts of Russia.

Close to movements the largest Arctic city actually also close

to the Norwegian border, meaning close to the NATO border.

Point being that the Northern Fleet is extremely important for

Russia, not only because off its prominence in the Arctic,

but because it gives Russia strategic access to the North

Atlantic as it's one of the few open ports ice

reports where Russia could save submarines or other vessels.

True that the gap between Greenland, Iceland, the UK and

Norway and down into the north Atlantic, thereby being important

for Russia's strategic abilities around the world.

So when Russia is trying to reinvigorate itself as a

great power under Vladimir Putin, it invests in military equipment

or strategic forces.

Some of these being located in the Arctic, but not

with explicit, are a component.

There's some component to the Northern Fleet, definitely, and to

Russia's military expansion in the Arctic.

That has to do with the Arctic itself.

Yes, but a lot of it has to do with

events taking place elsewhere with rivaling NATO, the relationship with

the US and etcetera.

And then additionally, to this comes China.

So China.

Only a few years ago, Chinese interests in the Arctic

were described us as only purely economic.

We all know that belt and road initiative of the

polar silk route, as as has been talked about.

We also know Chinese interest in shipping or even more

expansive in terms of energy plants development together with Russia.

But increasingly, we've also seen Chinese engagement in the Arctic

region purely for political purposes or for geopolitical purposes or

superpower purposes.

If you if you want, meaning that China is engaging

in the Arctic engaging in regional politics in the Arctic.

Whether it's true, the Arctic Council to fisheries agreements or

true true economic development.

Because China is the global superpower with interests in a

lot of different regions around the world.

And the Arctic is becoming a region that is more

on the agenda because of activity there, but also because

of the actors President Russia you, the U.

S. Norway and therefore China is increasingly engaging in this.

However, this is causing a backlash from the US We

have to be saw.

Statements last year from Secretary of State Mike Pompeo just

before an already council meeting in Finland, where he was

lambasting Russia and China in particularly China, even arguing that

China or Chinese engagement in the Arctic risks creating a

use out China Sea in the Arctic, which is maybe

not the most accurate description since China is not geographically

in the Arctic through its territory like it is in

this out trying to see the point being that suddenly

three us is throwing down the gauntlet, wanting to call

out on Chinese engagement in the Arctic and challenged us,

and if it's very little to do with the Arctic

itself, as I showed you during the Cold War, where

the Arctic was important for strategic purposes.

Again, it's becoming important for strategic purposes here and now

in the superpower, our rivalry between the U.

S. On China, so very little to do with the

Arctic itself.

But it takes place they in the Arctic, politically or

rhetorically, at least in the Arctic and finally, then jumping

from so first a good than the bad, if you

may. Now, to the ugly and maybe ugly is not

the right way to describe this.

But what I mean with ugly concerns bilateral relations in

the Arctic, where it's difficult to conclude, or to describe

them in a one liner or to just boil down

dynamics as either or there's not necessarily good dynamics or

bad dynamics.

It's a complex picture, and the best example to illustrate

this is the Norway Russia relations is trying to hide

out here with the map off the barrens region as

Norway, we talked about earlier being part of NATO Russia,

of course, being being Russia, and before that Soviet Union

at the Northern Fleet located close to the region and

NATO porter and Maritime boundary, causing friction, causing problems.

And increasingly, we've seen problems, whether it's it's provocative statements

from from Russian leaders or its military exercises on both

sides causing reactions in the other country, or even just

concerning small.

But the reason archipelago has seen on top of this

month where Russia has again with the 100 year anniversary

of the treaty offs, wallboard said some remarks that have

that have Ah, um brought forth underlying disputes concerning this

archipelago, point being that this relationship is complex and sensitive.

But in addition to this, Norway and Russia collaborates in

many domains whether it's culture, education, economic ventures across the

border, there's even a visa free regime just in the

in the nearby border region.

For both countries, the collaborate on fisheries in the north

managing from the largest fish stocks in the world.

Such a rescue, etcetera, etcetera.

This relationship is complex and it's naturally informed by what

happens on the international level right, whether there's a conflict

between NATO and Russia concerning Crimea or concerning Syria or

elsewhere. Of course it's it's partly informed by what happens

at the regional level.

The Arctic Council, a such or other regional development aspect

but it figures in the defense structures of thes two

countries as well.

So it's It's a sensitive domain complex domain and the

greed. Regional Bilateral relations are complex in that magnitude, as

this final map highlights their defense concept itself.

And this not just highlights the Trident juncture exercise in

2018. That again showcases some of the sensitivities and complexities

off this relationship.

Point being point being that this is a simplified way

off trying to analyze what is happening in the Arctic

at the moment, of course, doesn't capture the whole truth.

But it's more than just saying the Arctic is the

region off conflict or a region off corporation, there's much

more to it, the master.

Geopolitics in the Arctic - Østhagen, May 2020

Audio TranscriptAuto-generated