A cold war in the Arctic

The Arctic has long been a scene of confrontation with the West, becoming one back in the Soviet time. Now, the rivalry that had faded somewhat is restarting with renewed vigor. Meanwhile, new players come into the game, and the knot of problems is growing increasingly tight, acquiring also military component which is now coming to the fore.

First, the so-called global warming intensified talk of a possible reduction of the Arctic Ocean ice pack which could open the Northern Sea Route (NSR) to navigation year round.

It is well known that our planet is not a sphere, but rather an ellipsoid of revolution which is flattened at the poles. Therefore, the voyage from St. Petersburg to Vladivostok covers 14,200 kilometers over the NSR, while one across the Pacific, the Indian Ocean, through the Suez Canal and the Atlantic Sea covers as many as 23,200 kilometers. Thus, the NSR reduces the voyage time of a loaded ship by 20 days. Russian officials predict that the NSR will bring Russia up to 5.2 billion dollars a year.

However, the Arctic is attractive not only because of a shorter sea route.

According to the Science magazine, the Arctic ice pack hides about 83 billion barrels of oil, or 13 percent of the world’s undiscovered resources. Also, the Arctic can provide about 1,550 trillion cubic meters of natural gas. While the majority of undiscovered oil lies off the coast of Alaska, almost all Arctic natural gas resources are off the Russian shores.

Besides hydrocarbons, the region contains unique deposits of other minerals as well. They are estimated at 30 trillion dollars, with two-thirds of the total accounted for by energy resources.

Another factor is the Arctic’s strategic importance. It is well known that the shortest route to any point on the planet lies along a meridian. It is no accident that the first nuclear submarines entered the Arctic Ocean rather than any other.

After the collapse of the USSR, its military infrastructure has suffered a decline, partly collapsing, and partly becoming morally and physically obsolete. Now, though, the Kremlin has decided not only to restore its naval presence in the Arctic, but also to try and expand the nation’s polar possessions.

Arctic ambitions of the Kremlin have met, to say the least, a cold response from polar nations first of all, as the US, Canada, Finland, Norway and Denmark have opposed them. The UK has joined them lately as well. This list is not exhaustive, for nations from outside the region are now showing interest in the Arctic as well, such as China, which has begun building its own icebreakers, and India.

Russia has begun to strengthen the military infrastructure. As commander of the Northern Fleet Admiral Vladimir Korolev reported, in the six months since the fleet’s designation as an independent unified strategic command, “we have significantly strengthened our coastal component. Thanks to induction of modern nuclear submarines, I mean hulls of the Borey and Yasen projects, and improving our logistics capability, the combat potential of the Northern Fleet has increased manifold.” According to the admiral, “the development of an extensive military infrastructure on the Arctic islands all over the North, from islands of Franz Josef Land to the New Siberian Islands,” is continuing as well.

Naturally, such militaristic activity cannot remain unanswered.

Russia is ahead of the US in the number of icebreakers used in the Arctic, but America has joined forces with Canada on the issue. They jointly use both nations’ civilian vessels and warships (including icebreakers) under military cooperation framework established within the so-called united Permanent Joint Board on Defense (PJBD). In addition to the PJBD, military cooperation between the US and Canada is implemented through the North American Aerospace Defense Command. There is also increasing presence of US nuclear submarines in the Barents Sea. The Pentagon conducted a series of studies involving the use of nuclear submarines under a thick layer of ice and launching, besides ballistic missiles, also drones, to monitor the area and perform other tasks.

It is well known that history always repeats itself as farce. The Kremlin has no resources to oppose NATO in the Arctic. The USSR had not either. Suffice it to say that US spending on strengthening its Arctic submarine fleet will amount to five billion dollars from 2012 to 2016, which is roughly equal to the annual submarine budget of the Russian Navy. Deputy defense minister of Russia Anatoly Antonov believes that “NATO activity is several times higher than what is being done by the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation.” According to him, NATO’s military capabilities (including in the Arctic) are several times higher than those of Russia.

Russia’s drastic actions in the Arctic make its neighbors, at least those in the Arctic, to pool their defense efforts. Norway has proposed to create a military-political organization, called the Nordic Pact, which would cover Scandinavia and the Arctic and provide for joint military and border forces, intelligence agencies, Center for the Protection against Cyber Attacks and a system of coordination in the Arctic. NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg said during a visit to Norway that “being present in the Arctic is still an objective for the alliance.”

The much-publicized militarization of the Arctic is coming at the cost of weakening the Far Eastern defenses. Nezavisimoe voennoe obozrenie quoted deputy director of the Institute for Political and Military Analysis Aleksandr Khramchikhin as saying that the Russian Pacific Fleet was decaying even as Asian navies and the US Navy’s Pacific Fleet were growing stronger fast.

The vulnerability of the Arctic coast of Russia was clearly demonstrated in the summer of 1942, when German pocket battleship Admiral Scheer embarked on a raid in the Kara Sea during “Unternehmen Wunderland.” Ports and convoys were then saved from destruction only due to the Germans underestimating ice conditions in the western Arctic.

However, German submarine U-209 still attacked an NKVD marine convoy, carrying 300 prisoners to Norilsk GULAG camps, two miles from the northern coast of the Matveyev Island on August 17, 1942. All vessels sank, only 23 people out of 328 onboard were rescued, and all prisoners died in the attack.

The Soviet command did not learn the lessons of the Admiral Scheer raid, and another tragedy occurred in the summer of 1944. The Soviet convoy DB-5 was sunk on August 12-13, 1944, 60 miles from Bely Island in the Kara Sea by German submarine U-365. The tragedy claimed 378 lives among 752 passengers and crew of the convoy, while the fate of 51 people is unknown.

Amid militaristic frenzy, the Kremlin is starting a new cold war in the Arctic, which it cannot win. It is unclear what they are thinking. Having entered a conflict with Ukraine, they do not know how to get out of it. Having failed to defuse one conflict, they have started another. These people are playing with fire.