Arctic Battleground

Jared Rodnick

In 1948, when Aleksandr Kuznetsov and his team of Soviet scientists landed in the North Pole, the region had largely been regarded as an inaccessible and frozen wasteland. Few scientists, government officials, or members of the civilian population could foresee the strategic importance of such an area. Yet, over the last century, climate change and the development of new technology have transformed the inaccessible region into a rapidly changing battlefield. The melting of polar ice caps has unlocked access to an estimated 30% of the world's undiscovered gas reserves and critical Rare Earth Metals (REMs), critical to the production of weapons system components and mechanisms such as computer guidance systems. This discovery transforms the Arctic into a massive, untapped, reserve of vital minerals and resources, placing it at the forefront of European economic security and defense strategy. Northern European nations inherit increasingly prominent security risks as the Arctic landscape evolves and changes. 

From Frozen Frontier to Strategic Battleground: The Arctic in 21st-Century Security

With a warming rate at nearly four times the global average, causing the opening of new sea lanes, trade routes, and passageways for military transit, the Arctic has changed fundamentally. The primary beneficiary of this alteration, with over 24,000 kilometers of coastline on the Arctic Ocean, is Russia. Indeed, the Russian Federation stands to gain the most from the opening of Arctic passageways, which could see the Northern Sea Route (NSR) slash shipping times between Asia and Europe by up to 40%. This represents a significant reduction in transaction costs and fuel expenses for global shipping, potentially generating billions in transit tariffs and establishing the NSR as a strategic global trade route controlled by Moscow. What was once a desolate region could now become Russia’s means for greater naval investment, an outcome that threatens Baltic and broader NATO security. This development arrives as Finland and Sweden’s accession increases NATO’s northern geography, a move caused by the years-long conflict between Ukraine and Russia in the East of Europe. However, Russia is closely assisted in the Arctic with investment from China, whose own defense agency outlined the Arctic strategic importance in a 2018 White Paper, outlining Chinese-Arctic strategy for the remainder of the decade. What has become clear is that the next battleground for East and West will not be in Space or the Middle East; the coming frontier is the Arctic.

The Arctic coastline is a rapidly changing landform, one that Russian military strategists have already flagged as critical to Russia’s naval future. As nearly one-half of all Arctic coastline lies within Russian territory, it comes as no surprise that its Northern Fleet, which contains over 70 surface vessels and 30 subsurface vessels (including Khabarovsk-class submarines equipped to carry the nuclear armed Poseidon drone), has already been positioned adjacent to the Arctic, in the Murmansk Oblast region of Russia. In addition to this, Putin has ordered the re-opening of numerous Soviet operations bases, the development of undetectable hypersonic missiles, and specialized Arctic icebreaking ships designed to break through weakened layers of ice and open routes for naval travel. Putin’s show of force, financed by the strategic export revenues from Russia's resource-driven economy, represents a massive state-subsidized ramp-up in military production. Unlike for Russia, this would introduce a high cost-of-entry barrier for NATO and will force the alliance into a security-spending arms race, directly drawing the defense budgets of member states. Understanding that Russia already sees the Arctic as a security priority, there is no reason for NATO not to place equal importance on the region.

As previously mentioned, the accession of Finland and Sweden into NATO has changed the Arctic map (with regard to security strategy). With their accession, Northern Europe has been transformed into a continuous security zone; however, NATO still lacks a clear and concise plan of action for ensuring Arctic defense. As of Fall 2025, NATO priorities lie in deterrence and Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance (ISR), aiming to prevent direct conflict with Russia over the Arctic. However, with careful planning, a well thought-out plan for defense vitalization, and the development of deterrents against aggression from the East, NATO could reduce Russia’s advantage, limiting or even preventing further Arctic incursions. It is imperative that NATO utilizes its strategic Arctic positions in Northern Europe before Russia and China have had time to solidify forward operations bases (FOBs) in the Arctic. Any development of FOBs in the Arctic would position a state in a position of strength, allowing the conduction of naval operations and an increased degree of ISR on nearby nations. 

The successes of Joint Force Command (JFC) Norfolk, Allied Maritime Command, and Exercise Nordic Response have been remarkable steps in the right direction for the alliance, but further support and action are required. To start, the economic foundation of Europe must be protected. The complex and expansive network of fiber optic cables under the surface of Europe’s oceans and seas facilitate trillions of dollars in daily financial transactions; any sabotage constitutes an act of economic warfare that risks freezing global markets and starting catastrophic economic collapse. Similarly, pipelines provide vital natural gas, making their protection essential to maintaining energy price stability and preventing a crippling supply shock across Western Europe which relies on said gas for everything from residential heating to commercial manufacturing. While the Haakonsvern Naval Base in Norway has been successful in submarine operations, an additional base even farther North will be needed as passageways open in the Arctic, especially to preserve abilities to monitor and track Russian naval movements. This is a key aspect of NATO Arctic defense that is not to be overlooked, as it will allow time for warning before an attack or move of aggression by Arctic players and should act as a deterrent to expansion into Western regions of the Arctic. 

What has become clear is that the Arctic is no longer a frigid wasteland; it is the upcoming battlefield. The future success and the longevity of NATO will weigh heavily on taking action and anticipating the changing frontier, not reacting to moves from other Arctic players, the cost of which will be the forfeiture of strategic economic leverage in the 21st century.