The resurgence of Russian power in the Arctic and High North will be a key consideration for NATO planners. The Alliance’s northern flank represents both a potential vulnerability due to its relative isolation and an area in which NATO enjoys options for horizontal escalation in a conflict. Moreover, as the effects of climate change create opportunities for both navigation and resource extraction, peacetime control over the Northern Sea Route (NSR) and a contest to establish effective administrative control in this area are likely. Disagreements regarding the degree of Russia’s jurisdiction over the NSR could, for example, simmer into a form of sub-threshold competition. The purpose of this Whitehall Paper will be to examine the balance of power between NATO and Russia in this critical region in order to establish the level of ambition that the capabilities being developed by Russia can support.

The Arctic, long described as the world’s last frontier, is quickly becoming our first frontier—the front line in a world of more diffuse power, sharper geopolitical competition, and deepening interdependencies between people and nature. A space of often-bitter cold, the Arctic is the fastest-warming place on earth. It is humanity’s canary in the coal mine—an early warning sign of the world’s climate crisis. The Arctic “regime” has pioneered many innovative means of governance among often-contentious state and non-state actors. Instead of being the “last white dot on the map,” the Arctic is where the contours of our rapidly evolving world may first be glimpsed. In this book, scholars and practitioners—from Anchorage to Moscow, from Nuuk to Hong Kong—explore the huge political, legal, social, economic, geostrategic and environmental challenges confronting the Arctic regime, and what this means for the future of world order.

This book investigates several aspects of military power and security in the North Atlantic and Arctic regions. NATO’s northern flank is a large maritime and littoral theatre, where NATO directly borders Russia’s Northern Fleet Military Administrative Territory, which is the location of some of Russia’s most potent air, sea, and land power capabilities. While military tensions on the northern flank had been relatively low for years, the Ukraine war and increased great-power rivalry have altered that dynamic, with heightened geopolitical tensions. This has increased the focus on military-strategic competition in this northernmost region of the alliance. This book presents new assessments of several aspects of military power and security in the North Atlantic and Arctic regions. With an analysis of the security and political climate in the High North and of developments in Western military strategies, capabilities, doctrines, and operational concepts, the volume seeks to bring together an holistic understanding of the strategic challenges and opportunities facing the North Atlantic states and NATO in this dynamic area of responsibility for the alliance. In doing this, the book provides key insights into the role of branch-specific and joint approaches to power projection and operations in the High North, which also include selected country case studies. This book will be of much interest to students of NATO, military studies, security studies, and International Relations.

Dominant narratives about the changing character of warfare and the revolutionary effect of technological advancement lack nuance and can ultimately be detrimental to the development of a defence capability fit for future purpose.

The resurgence of Russian power in the Arctic and High North will be a key consideration for NATO planners. The Alliance's northern flank represents both a potential vulnerability due to its relative isolation and an area in which NATO enjoys options for horizontal escalation in a conflict. Moreover, as the effects of climate change create opportunities for both navigation and resource extraction, peacetime control over the Northern Sea Route (NSR) and a contest to establish effective administrative control in this area are likely. Disagreements regarding the degree of Russia's jurisdiction over the NSR could, for example, simmer into a form of sub-threshold competition. The purpose of this Whitehall Paper will be to examine the balance of power between NATO and Russia in this critical region in order to establish the level of ambition that the capabilities being developed by Russia can support.

Against the backdrop of climate change and tectonic political shifts in world politics, this handbook provides an overview of the most crucial geopolitical and security related issues in the Arctic. It discusses established shareholder's policies in the Arctic – those of Russia, Canada, the USA, Denmark, and Norway – as well as the politics and interests of other significant or future stakeholders, including China and India. Furthermore, it explains the economic situation and the legal framework that governs the Arctic, and the claims that Arctic states have made in order to expand their territories and exclusive economic zones. While illustrating the collaborative approach, represented by institutions such as the Arctic council, which has often been described as an exceptional institution in this region, the contributing authors examine potential resource and power conflicts between Arctic nations, due to competing interests. The authors also address topics such as changing alliances between Arctic nations, new sea lines of communication, technological shifts, and eventually the return to power politics in the area. Written by experts on international security studies and the Arctic, as well as practitioners from government institutions and international organizations, the book provides an invaluable source of information for anyone interested in geopolitical shifts and security issues in the High North.

In this new Brookings Marshall Paper, Michael O'Hanlon argues that now is the time for Western nations to negotiate a new security architecture for neutral countries in eastern Europe to stabilize the region and reduce the risks of war with Russia. He believes NATO expansion has gone far enough. The core concept of this new security architecture would be one of permanent neutrality. The countries in question collectively make a broken-up arc, from Europe's far north to its south: Finland and Sweden; Ukraine, Moldova, and Belarus; Georgia, Armenia, and Azerbaijan; and finally Cyprus plus Serbia, as well as possibly several other Balkan states. Discussion on the new framework should begin within NATO, followed by deliberation with the neutral countries themselves, and then formal negotiations with Russia. The new security architecture would require that Russia, like NATO, commit to help uphold the security of Ukraine, Georgia, Moldova, and other states in the region. Russia would have to withdraw its troops from those countries in a verifiable manner; after that, corresponding sanctions on Russia would be lifted. The neutral countries would retain their rights to participate in multilateral security operations on a scale comparable to what has been the case in the past, including even those operations that might be led by NATO. They could think of and describe themselves as Western states (or anything else, for that matter). If the European Union and they so wished in the future, they could join the EU. They would have complete sovereignty and self-determination in every sense of the word. But NATO would decide not to invite them into the alliance as members. Ideally, these nations would endorse and promote this concept themselves as a more practical way to ensure their security than the current situation or any other plausible alternative.