• woodrow wilson center
  • ecsp

New Security Beat

Subscribe:
  • mail-to
  • Who We Are
  • Topics
    • Population
    • Environment
    • Security
    • Health
    • Development
  • Columns
    • China Environment Forum
    • Choke Point
    • Dot-Mom
    • Navigating the Poles
    • New Security Broadcast
    • Reading Radar
  • Multimedia
    • Water Stories (Podcast Series)
    • Backdraft (Podcast Series)
    • Tracking the Energy Titans (Interactive)
  • Films
    • Water, Conflict, and Peacebuilding (Animated Short)
    • Paving the Way (Ethiopia)
    • Broken Landscape (India)
    • Scaling the Mountain (Nepal)
    • Healthy People, Healthy Environment (Tanzania)
  • Publications
  • Events
  • Contact Us

NewSecurityBeat

The blog of the Wilson Center's Environmental Change and Security Program
  • United States Elevates Arctic to National Security Prerogative

    January 16, 2009 By Will Rogers
    “The United States has broad and fundamental national security interests in the Arctic region and is prepared to operate either independently or in conjunction with other states to safeguard these interests,” states National Security Presidential Directive 66 (NSPD-66), issued by President Bush on Monday. NSPD-66 does pay some attention to “softer” Arctic issues, such as environmental protection, international scientific cooperation, and the involvement of the Arctic’s indigenous communities in decisions that affect them. But it still takes a tough stance on access to natural resources, boundary issues, and freedom of the seas/maritime transportation. With the rapid shrinking of Arctic ice caps making the region more accessible, the world is likely to see increased competition between the eight Arctic states—the United States, Canada, Denmark, Finland, Norway, Russia, and Sweden—over territorial claims and natural resources like oil and natural gas.

    The opportunity to gain control over nearly a quarter of the world’s untapped oil and natural gas reserves will cause “a recalibration of geo-strategic power,” writes Scott Borgerson, visiting fellow for ocean governance at the Council on Foreign Relations, in the November 2008 issue of the Atlantic. With the world economic crisis slowing the development of alternative energy technologies, energy consumers will continue to be held hostage by volatile oil and natural gas markets, making those with control over these resources strong geopolitical players. Europe receives one-fifth of its natural gas from Russia, which has abundant reserves. And Russia has leveraged these reserves in an effort to slow the pace of former Soviet states’ accession into NATO and the EU.

    Sweden and Norway recently forged a new defense relationship to address the rise of Russian power, and Finland, “also spooked by an increasingly assertive Russia,” will likely join the new Nordic defense pact. Among the pressing concerns for the Nordic alliance is to “make plans for what they call the ‘high north’, the energy-rich area that lies between Europe and the North Pole,” writes Edward Lucas in the Economist’s The World in 2009.

    If the Nordic states gain significant control of Arctic oil and natural gas reserves, the European balance of power could shift further toward the West, a situation Russia is eager to prevent. Meanwhile, Canada, “alarmed by Russian adventurism in the Arctic,” has also strongly asserted its claims to Arctic sovereignty. “Canada has taken its sovereignty too lightly for too long,” said then-Prime Minister Stephen Harper in 2007. “This government has put a big emphasis on reinforcing, on strengthening our sovereignty in the Arctic.” Denmark, Great Britain, and Iceland, also mindful of the importance of Arctic resources, will likely stake claims to newly discovered resources. With the United States prepared to operate independently—at least according to the outgoing Bush administration—and its Arctic neighbors not likely to back away from their own interests, this once-frozen region could become a political hotspot.

    Photo: A Canadian naval submarine, the HMCS Corner Brook, patrols in Arctic waters as part of a Canada Command sovereignty operation in the Hudson Strait in August 2007. Courtesy of MCpl Blake Rodgers, Formation Imaging Services, Halifax, Nova Scotia, and flickr user lafrancevi.

    Topics: Arctic, climate change, foreign policy, military, natural resources, security
    • http://www.blogger.com/profile/04711234022013448064 Tapani

      The New Security Beat is right in drawing attention to the consequences of warming in the Arctic region. I also agree on the interpretation of Russia.
      Energy-rich Russia does not behave in the way we would like it to
      behave.
      However, the picture of the Nordic countries’ reactions is misleading in two. First, the primary reason for the military cooperation between Norway, Sweden, and Finland is not any sudden fear of the Russian bear but rising military costs. And the three Nordic countries have not signed any official “defense pact,” but merely cooperate, e.g., in arms
      development and procurement. Despite this cooperation, Norway recently decided to buy American F-35 aircraft instead of Swedish Gripens.
      Second, I have never heard that Sweden and Finland have plans for
      gaining control of Arctic oil and gas reserves. The explanation is simple: Sweden and Finland are not coastal states, and most of the oil and gas are in Alaska
      and in Russia, in regions that are not subject to much territorial
      dispute.
      Nevertheless, it makes sense to analyze the political consequences of the increasing economic activity in the Arctic region, the impact on the environment, and the ability of the Arctic Council and other institutions to cope with the change.
      Tapani Vaahtoranta

    • http://www.blogger.com/profile/18337694112852162181 Geoff Dabelko

      Some interesting coverage of a speech by the NATO General Secretary on rising role of the Arctic for the alliance. “What is very clear is that the High North is going to require more of the Alliance’s attention in the coming years, NATO’s General Secretary Jaap de Hoop Scheffer said in the alliance’s Seminar on Security Prospects in the High North last week. Climate change will make the alliance play a bigger role in the region, the NATO leader argued.”

    • http://www.blogger.com/profile/00957532713455374321 Will Rogers

      A recent Reuters’ article says Russia will not stay idle in the race for the exploit of resources in the Arctic. Artur Chilingarov, presidential envoy for international cooperation in the Arctic and Antarctic, told Reuters, “We have worked in the Arctic and we are working there now. There is of course (competition)…But we are not going to stand still.”

    • http://www.e-ir.info/?p=460 Mackinnon Lawrence

      An Arctic “land” grab is a dangerous proposition given the twin bombs posed by peak oil and climate change. Drilling in the Arctic only delays a concerted response to these issues among industrialized countries with interests in the High North. Though a difficult proposition, the establishment of a conservation regime over oil resources in the Arctic commons offers another way forward:

      http://www.e-ir.info/?p=460

    • Anonymous

      This is a very interesting post because we discussed this issue in regard to a resource security standpoint in a class of mine. The whole idea of climate change and the future availability of Arctic oil reserves makes me wonder how the war in Iraq will be affected, if at all. Will the warming of the Arctic pull attention away from oil in Arab countries? How will the global economy respond when more countries have access to oil? I am interested in seeing how all of these factors affect industrialized countries such as the US and Canada.

    • Anonymous

      Adding to the previous response, energy is a major issue and will continue to have more influence in national politics than it already has. The following link addresses this issue in more detail:

      http://www.cnas.org/climatechange?gclid=CPXo9eTTopoCFQSPFQodzniF9w

Join the Conversation

  • RSS
  • subscribe
  • facebook
  • G+
  • twitter
  • iTunes
  • podomatic
  • youtube
Tweets by NewSecurityBeat

Trending Stories

  • unfccclogo1
  • Pop at COP: Population and Family Planning at the UN Climate Negotiations

Featured Media

Backdraft Podcast

play Backdraft
Podcasts

More »

What You're Saying

  • shutterstock_1858965709 Break the Bias: Breaking Barriers to Women’s Global Health Leadership
    Sarah Ngela Ngasi: Nous souhaitons que le partenaire nous apporte son soutien technique et financier.
  • shutterstock_1858965709 Break the Bias: Breaking Barriers to Women’s Global Health Leadership
    Sarah Ngela Ngasi: Nous sommes une organisation féminine dénommée: Actions Communautaires pour le Développement de...
  • hongqiao-liu1 As China Adjusts for “True Cost” of Rare Earths, What Does It Mean for Decarbonization?
    Anthony Maw: It is just another one of those "inconvenient truths". Western defense and security analysts often...

Related Stories

No related stories.

  • woodrow
  • ecsp
  • RSS Feed
  • YouTube
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Home
  • Who We Are
  • Publications
  • Events
  • Wilson Center
  • Contact Us
  • Print Friendly Page

© Copyright 2007-2023. Environmental Change and Security Program.

Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars. All rights reserved.

Developed by Vico Rock Media

Environmental Change and Security Program

Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars

Ronald Reagan Building and International Trade Center

  • One Woodrow Wilson Plaza
  • 1300 Pennsylvania Ave., NW
  • Washington, DC 20004-3027

T 202-691-4000