The Geopolitical Development in the Arctic Reflects the World Order, Says Researcher
Rasmus Gjedssø Bertelsen, professor i nordområdestudier ved UiT Norges arktiske universitet (i midten). Her på rundebordskonferanse om arktisk sikkerhet i Stavanger i 2018, i regi av sikkerhetskonferansen i München. (Foto: MSC/Kuhlmann).
UiT Researcher Rasmus Gjedssø Bertelsen rejects the idea of 'Arctic exceptionalism' and believes the Arctic mirrors the global power struggle between the East and the West. He believes this Arctic divide will likely only escalate. The US with Trump in the forefront will also impact this relationship, but the country will still have major security policy interests in the region, he says to HNN.
UiT The Arctic University of Norway and Professor of High North Studies, Rasmus Gjedssø Bertelsen, believes the Arctic is divided between a NATO-led western Arctic and a Russian Arctic with close ties to the BRICS countries, particularly China and India. The Arctic's delineation of global power constellations can be traced far back and will also continue into the future.
He believes there are two common, but incorrect, narratives about the Arctic. One is based on the idea of 'Arctic exceptionalism' - that the cooperation in the Arctic is not impacted by conflict in other areas. The other is the narrative around the interest in the Arctic and that the region gained importance in the last 15 years due to climate change and a race for resources.
However, the Arctic has reflected international orders for centuries, he writes in a new research article. The increasing rivalry between the West and a growing non-western bloc led by China and Russia is no exemption.
Historical development
Bertelsen writes that the Arctic was multipolar before the world wars, bipolar during the Cold War, and then unipolar. Today, the Arctic mirrors the geopolitical situation with Chinese-American bi- and multipolarity.
After the fall of the Soviet Union, a liberal world order was raised with US hegemony, writes Bertelsen. This could also be seen in the Arctic, in which the Russian state withdrew from its Arctic to a significant extent, leaving military facilities and society behind.
He believes there is wishful thinking in the West to return to this and, thus, a liberal Arctic.
But this is an unrealistic wish and the chances for the Arctic becoming a cooperation area in the same way as after the war are poor, believes Bertelsen.
"The US unipolarity after the Cold War was an exceptional time of international history and not the ‘End of History’ as believed by some quarters in the West (Fukuyama). History is returning to normal with the return of major centers of economic output and science and technology outside the West."
USA versus China
After the Cold War, the US unipolarity is weakened by increasing globalization, among other things, , facilitating the faster relative growth of non-Western States. China's economic growth and technological progress allow the country to return to its historical position as one of the world's largest economies.
In line with China's growth and great power competition with the US, the country also engages in Arctic matters. Through scientific cooperation, investments and technology, the country now has a growing role in the Arctic.
"The unfortunate Chinese term of ‘near-Arctic State’ to legitimize Chinese involvement in the Arctic drew much Western ridicule and opposition. In comparison, the US and the West seem to be ‘near-everywhere’ States," writes the researcher.
While the US is trying to limit Chinese influence in the region, Russia is trying to develop its Arctic economy through cooperation with BRICS countries, particularly China and India.
Russia, represented here by MFA Sergei Lavrov, is reaching out to the BRICS countries for cooperation in a number of spheres and parts of the world – not least in the Arctic. Here, Lavrov is at a BRICS summit in South Africa in August 2023 with the leaders of the cooperation format: (from left) Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, Chinese President Xi Jinping, South African President Cyril Ramaphosa and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi. (Photo: GCIS)
The conflict between Russia and the US
Russia has been pressured by Western sanctions to turn toward non-western partners in both the energy and research sectors after the Crimea annexation in 2014 and the invasion of Ukraine in 2022, but the security policy competition between Russia and the US has been clear since 2007-2008, writes Bertelsen.
This conflict is also part of dividing the Arctic. Sanctions against Russian energy development in the Arctic and the halt in military, scientific, and technological cooperation in the region pressured Russia to seek cooperation with BRICS+.
BRICS is a cooperation forum for Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa. Gradually, more countries have joined the cooperation, which is now called BRICS+. The background for the cooperation framework was their rapidly growing economies and increasing political influence in the world (vis-à-vis the West).
Today's geopolitical situation
Russia is now the only Arctic country not a member of NATO and the two parties now represent two sides of the increased militarization of the Arctic.
The US, on its side, is determined to prolong its unipolar dominance as it was after the Cold War. The US wants to define the rules, to whom, and when they apply.
"Europe has found an apparently comfortable and completely dependent position in this US-led order. The Rest of the World is less so, with China and Russia explicitly rejecting this US-led order."
Bertelsen writes that the Arctic is now divided between a NATO Arctic, spearheaded by the US, and a Russian Arctic, seeking cooperation with BRICS+ countries. This reflects a global rivalry between the US/NATO and Russia/China, in which cooperation is minimal and the risk of conflict is heightened.
The researcher believes the world is heading toward a deep and long-term conflict between the US and NATO+ on one side and BRICS+ on the other. This divide will impact the Arctic, in which geopolitical tensions will likely strengthen instead of decreasing. This will lead to more conflict and less economic development and growth, as opposed to the globalization after the Cold War.
Thus, the Arctic will continue to mirror the great power situation.
Europe is still deeply dependent on the US in NATO.
The USA with Trump at the forefront
8 weeks into Donald Trump's presidency of the USA, the relationship between the great powers has changed. The researcher tells HNN that Trump has changed the US policy towards Russia and Europe.
"But the US is still focused on the competition with China and on maintaining American economic, technological, scientific, and thus military superiority over China," he says and continues:
"President Trump appears to want to sacrifice Ukraine and Europe to focus on the competition with China. Europe is still deeply dependent on the US in NATO, despite sudden European recognition of this dependence and attempts at greater strategic independence. Europe has for decades rejected French ideas about strategic independence in particular."
But the US will still have strong security policy interests in the Arctic regarding the nuclear balance with Russia, and China to an increasing degree, missile defense, and space security, explains Bertelsen.
"The US will maintain a strong interest in the Barents region to threaten the Russian nuclear deterrent (US counterforce strategy), as well as for access to intelligence aimed at Russia, which is reflected in Norwegian-US intelligence cooperation throughout the Cold War and later," the researcher concludes.
