The Arctic is a bit of the “unspoken” of the ongoing standoff between Russia and the West. But the side effect of the war in Ukraine can be considerable there. On the military level first, you just have to look at a map to understand. To the north of Finland and Russia, the Arctic is a potential front line, especially with the gradual melting of the ice due to global warming.
On both sides, the military presence continues to be reinforced. Russia has created an Arctic navy and plans to deploy hypersonic missiles and nuclear weapons in the area. For five years, it has multiplied military exercises in the region. Opposite, NATO is doing the same thing. The North Atlantic Treaty Alliance organized maneuvers at the end of March, codenamed “Cold Response”, cold response.
And the melting ice increases the risks. Quite simply because everyone, on each side of the ocean, suddenly feels more vulnerable to enemy attacks. Remember that within 20 years, it is possible that the ice will melt completely during the summer in the Arctic zone. Finland’s entry into NATO will therefore mechanically mean a strengthening of the presence of the Atlantic Alliance in the Far North. And Article 5 of NATO could therefore be triggered in the event of a Russian attack in the Arctic zone of the Barents Sea. It would involve all members of the Alliance in the conflict in the event of aggression in Northern Finland.
Then there is the economic stake and it is colossal. The Arctic subsoil contains around 25% of the world’s fossil fuel resources. Lots of gas, oil and also minerals: gold, uranium, nickel, rare metals. Moscow has initiated a hundred projects in the region. We must add the fish resource, for fishing and of course trade, with the opening of the Route du Nord sea route, which will become, by far, the fastest route between Europe and Asia.
But all this only works if there is agreement between the neighboring countries: either to share the resources, or precisely not to exploit these resources in the name of climatic imperatives. The growing tension between the East and the West therefore hits this potential balance. This tension may also limit Russian ambitions. Why ? Because many of these projects depend on Western funding and technologies. This is the case, for example, of the Arctic LNG2 base, intended to exploit millions of tonnes of liquefied gas.
There is, however, a negotiating body to avoid these tensions: it is the Arctic Council. It brings together the bordering countries: Russia (which alone owns half of the Arctic coastline) and seven Western countries: Canada, the United States, Finland, Denmark, Iceland, Norway, Sweden. In recent years, the Council had functioned rather well, precisely in the name of the common good of Humanity, of the awareness that the Arctic is a fragile zone. But today, all its work is suspended, at least until next year. Decision of the West “due to the flagrant violation of the sovereignty of Ukraine”. Proof that the war in Ukraine and the NATO-Russia tension have direct repercussions in the Arctic.