GNSI Decision Brief: Strategic Competition in the Arctic: Sooner or Later?

The Arctic has a reputation for being dark, cold, and inhospitable but melting sea ice has made natural resources more accessible and opened shipping lanes, drawing the attention of the great powers. In 1996, to deal with competing interests the eight Arctic nations (Canada, Denmark, Finland, Icelan...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Schnaufer, Tad
Format: Text
Language:unknown
Published: Digital Commons @ University of South Florida 2023
Subjects:
Online Access:https://digitalcommons.usf.edu/gnsi_decision_briefs/9
https://doi.org/10.5038/HJDH3296
https://digitalcommons.usf.edu/context/gnsi_decision_briefs/article/1008/viewcontent/GNSI_Decision_Brief_Strategic_Competition_in_the_Arctic_Sooner_or_Later.pdf
id ftunisfloridatam:oai:digitalcommons.usf.edu:gnsi_decision_briefs-1008
record_format openpolar
spelling ftunisfloridatam:oai:digitalcommons.usf.edu:gnsi_decision_briefs-1008 2024-01-14T10:03:26+01:00 GNSI Decision Brief: Strategic Competition in the Arctic: Sooner or Later? Schnaufer, Tad 2023-12-06T08:00:00Z application/pdf https://digitalcommons.usf.edu/gnsi_decision_briefs/9 https://doi.org/10.5038/HJDH3296 https://digitalcommons.usf.edu/context/gnsi_decision_briefs/article/1008/viewcontent/GNSI_Decision_Brief_Strategic_Competition_in_the_Arctic_Sooner_or_Later.pdf unknown Digital Commons @ University of South Florida https://digitalcommons.usf.edu/gnsi_decision_briefs/9 doi:10.5038/HJDH3296 https://digitalcommons.usf.edu/context/gnsi_decision_briefs/article/1008/viewcontent/GNSI_Decision_Brief_Strategic_Competition_in_the_Arctic_Sooner_or_Later.pdf GNSI Decision Briefs text 2023 ftunisfloridatam https://doi.org/10.5038/HJDH3296 2023-12-21T19:11:25Z The Arctic has a reputation for being dark, cold, and inhospitable but melting sea ice has made natural resources more accessible and opened shipping lanes, drawing the attention of the great powers. In 1996, to deal with competing interests the eight Arctic nations (Canada, Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, Russia, Sweden, and the United States) signed the Ottawa Treaty creating the Arctic Council. This council is an intergovernmental forum promoting cooperation in the region and involves 13 non-Arctic nations including China, France, India, Japan, and Poland. Most of the Arctic nations are U.S. Allies. Once Sweden joins NATO, Russia will be the only Arctic nation not in the alliance. Even with its allies, American capabilities in the region are challenged by Russia. Comparatively, Russia has extensive infrastructure and military bases in the region and has amassed the largest icebreaker fleet in the world with 46 ships. The United States has five and China only three. Even if the United States and its allies combined assets, it would number only 40 icebreakers. Icebreakers alone do not indicate a nation’s Arctic capability, but provide one indicator to be considered along with military bases, regional infrastructure, and air forces. Considering this situation, three main factors have pulled the great powers to the region. (1) The year-on-year reduction of sea ice has allowed greater access to shipping lanes and natural resources. (2) New technologies have made the region more accessible. This includes modern icebreakers, all-weather airstrips, drones, floating nuclear power plants, regional infrastructure improvements, and remote- sensing equipment. (3) The Arctic could provide alternative sources of oil and Rare Earth Elements (REE). With this purported opening of the Arctic, how should the United States and its allies respond? https://digitalcommons.usf.edu/gnsi_decision_briefs/1008/thumbnail.jpg Text Arctic Council Arctic Iceland Sea ice Digital Commons University of South Florida (USF) Arctic Canada Norway Lanes ENVELOPE(18.933,18.933,69.617,69.617)
institution Open Polar
collection Digital Commons University of South Florida (USF)
op_collection_id ftunisfloridatam
language unknown
description The Arctic has a reputation for being dark, cold, and inhospitable but melting sea ice has made natural resources more accessible and opened shipping lanes, drawing the attention of the great powers. In 1996, to deal with competing interests the eight Arctic nations (Canada, Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, Russia, Sweden, and the United States) signed the Ottawa Treaty creating the Arctic Council. This council is an intergovernmental forum promoting cooperation in the region and involves 13 non-Arctic nations including China, France, India, Japan, and Poland. Most of the Arctic nations are U.S. Allies. Once Sweden joins NATO, Russia will be the only Arctic nation not in the alliance. Even with its allies, American capabilities in the region are challenged by Russia. Comparatively, Russia has extensive infrastructure and military bases in the region and has amassed the largest icebreaker fleet in the world with 46 ships. The United States has five and China only three. Even if the United States and its allies combined assets, it would number only 40 icebreakers. Icebreakers alone do not indicate a nation’s Arctic capability, but provide one indicator to be considered along with military bases, regional infrastructure, and air forces. Considering this situation, three main factors have pulled the great powers to the region. (1) The year-on-year reduction of sea ice has allowed greater access to shipping lanes and natural resources. (2) New technologies have made the region more accessible. This includes modern icebreakers, all-weather airstrips, drones, floating nuclear power plants, regional infrastructure improvements, and remote- sensing equipment. (3) The Arctic could provide alternative sources of oil and Rare Earth Elements (REE). With this purported opening of the Arctic, how should the United States and its allies respond? https://digitalcommons.usf.edu/gnsi_decision_briefs/1008/thumbnail.jpg
format Text
author Schnaufer, Tad
spellingShingle Schnaufer, Tad
GNSI Decision Brief: Strategic Competition in the Arctic: Sooner or Later?
author_facet Schnaufer, Tad
author_sort Schnaufer, Tad
title GNSI Decision Brief: Strategic Competition in the Arctic: Sooner or Later?
title_short GNSI Decision Brief: Strategic Competition in the Arctic: Sooner or Later?
title_full GNSI Decision Brief: Strategic Competition in the Arctic: Sooner or Later?
title_fullStr GNSI Decision Brief: Strategic Competition in the Arctic: Sooner or Later?
title_full_unstemmed GNSI Decision Brief: Strategic Competition in the Arctic: Sooner or Later?
title_sort gnsi decision brief: strategic competition in the arctic: sooner or later?
publisher Digital Commons @ University of South Florida
publishDate 2023
url https://digitalcommons.usf.edu/gnsi_decision_briefs/9
https://doi.org/10.5038/HJDH3296
https://digitalcommons.usf.edu/context/gnsi_decision_briefs/article/1008/viewcontent/GNSI_Decision_Brief_Strategic_Competition_in_the_Arctic_Sooner_or_Later.pdf
long_lat ENVELOPE(18.933,18.933,69.617,69.617)
geographic Arctic
Canada
Norway
Lanes
geographic_facet Arctic
Canada
Norway
Lanes
genre Arctic Council
Arctic
Iceland
Sea ice
genre_facet Arctic Council
Arctic
Iceland
Sea ice
op_source GNSI Decision Briefs
op_relation https://digitalcommons.usf.edu/gnsi_decision_briefs/9
doi:10.5038/HJDH3296
https://digitalcommons.usf.edu/context/gnsi_decision_briefs/article/1008/viewcontent/GNSI_Decision_Brief_Strategic_Competition_in_the_Arctic_Sooner_or_Later.pdf
op_doi https://doi.org/10.5038/HJDH3296
_version_ 1788058236289548288