DiploWiki

Summary: Prisoners of Geography: Arctic

This image captures a breathtaking and serene view of a vast icy landscape, likely in a polar region such as the Arctic. It features two individuals standing amidst a field of fragmented sea ice, surrounded by a panorama of frozen scenery under a soft, diffused light. The ice appears in various shades of blue and white, reflecting the subtle hues of the sky at either dawn or dusk, which casts a gentle pink and purple glow across the horizon. In the background, rugged mountains covered in snow enhance the majesty and isolation of this cold, remote environment. The individuals, dressed in heavy winter gear, seem small against the expansive ice field, emphasizing the scale and the harsh conditions of the area. This scene not only showcases the stark beauty of Arctic regions but also subtly highlights the impact of climate change, as evidenced by the melting and thinning ice. The overall mood is one of awe and contemplative silence, inviting reflection on the natural beauty and the environmental changes occurring in such extreme parts of the world.
The melting of the ice caps in the Arctic. Image by Roxanne Desgagnés.

In 2015, British journalist Tim Marshall published Prisoners of Geography: Ten Maps That Tell You Everything You Need to Know About Global Politics. This book breaks the globe into ten regions, analyzing how geographical features like rivers, mountains, and seas influence political decisions, military strategies, and economic development. Tim Marshall is praised for making a complex topic accessible and engaging. However, his book also faces criticism for certain omissions. Critics point out that by focusing solely on geography, Marshall sometimes neglects other significant factors in political decision-making. In any case, it is useful to learn from the ideas in Prisoners of Geography.

Below, there is a summary of the tenth chapter of the book, which focuses on the Arctic. You can find all available summaries of this book, or you can read the summary from the previous chapter of the book, by clicking these links.


The Russians have been leading the occupation of the Arctic. They have the strongest presence and the best preparation for the harsh Arctic conditions, while other nations, including the USA, lag significantly behind. The USA, despite being an Arctic nation, lacks a coherent strategy for the region.

Global warming’s impact is highly visible in the Arctic, where melting ice facilitates easier access. This coincides with the discovery of energy deposits and advancements in extraction technology, attracting the attention of Arctic nations. These countries, with competing claims, are now more inclined to assert their rights, leading to potential conflicts over the region’s vast resources.

The term “Arctic” originates from the Greek word “artikos”, meaning “near the bear”, referencing the Ursa Major constellation that points to the North Star. The Arctic Ocean, despite being the smallest, covers 5.4 million square miles, almost as large as Russia and 1.5 times the size of the USA. Its extensive continental shelves contribute to sovereignty disputes.

The Arctic region encompasses parts of Canada, Finland, Greenland, Iceland, Norway, Russia, Sweden, and the USA (Alaska). It is characterized by extreme conditions, with summer temperatures briefly reaching 26 degrees Celsius and winter temperatures plummeting below minus 45 degrees. The landscape features rocky expanses, fjords, polar deserts, and rivers, offering both hostility and beauty that has captivated people for millennia.

The first recorded expedition to the Arctic was in 330 BCE by Greek mariner Pytheas of Massilia, who described a land called ‘Thule’. His tales of pure white landscapes and strange creatures were initially met with skepticism, but they marked the beginning of many awe-inspiring Arctic explorations.

Numerous explorers sought the mythical Northwest Passage, including Henry Hudson, who in 1607 was abandoned by his crew and presumably perished. The quest for the North Pole has been fraught with challenges. Sir Edward Parry’s 1827 attempt failed due to moving ice, while Captain Sir John Franklin’s 1845 expedition ended in tragedy, with all 129 members dying after their ships became icebound.

Despite these setbacks, explorers like Roald Amundsen succeeded. In 1905, Amundsen navigated the Northwest Passage with a small crew, marking a significant achievement. He later attempted to fly over the North Pole in 1926 with an international team, symbolizing human determination.

In more recent times, Japanese adventurer Shinji Kazama reached the North Pole on a motorbike in 1987, demonstrating the shrinking polar ice cap. This reduction in ice is documented through satellite imagery, with most scientists attributing it to human-induced climate change. This melting has profound effects on the region’s wildlife and ecosystems, with species like polar bears and Arctic foxes migrating, and fish stocks shifting northward.

The melting Arctic ice has global consequences, threatening low-lying countries with increased flooding. As the ice melts, the exposed tundra accelerates the process due to the Albedo effect, where darker land and water absorb more heat. This warming could benefit local agriculture but also signifies the rapid transformation of one of the world’s last great unspoiled regions. Climate models predict an ice-free Arctic in summer by the end of the century, with some suggesting it could happen much sooner. The changes are already underway and will continue to shape the region’s future.

The melting Arctic ice cap is already facilitating the navigation of cargo ships through the Northwest Passage in the Canadian archipelago during several summer weeks each year, significantly reducing transit times from Europe to China. In 2014, the Nunavik became the first cargo ship to traverse this route unescorted, carrying 23,000 tons of nickel ore to China. This route is 40% shorter than the Panama Canal, allowing more cargo, saving fuel costs, and reducing greenhouse gas emissions. By 2040, the passage could be open for up to two months annually, altering global trade routes and affecting revenues for the Suez and Panama Canals.

The Northern Sea Route along the Siberian coast is also becoming increasingly navigable for several months each year, gaining popularity as a sea highway. The retreating ice is exposing potential wealth, with significant undiscovered natural gas and oil reserves expected in the Arctic. In 2008, the United States Geological Survey estimated vast quantities of natural gas, oil, and natural gas liquids, primarily offshore. As more territory becomes accessible, additional reserves of gold, zinc, nickel, and iron might be discovered.

Energy giants like ExxonMobil, Shell, and Rosneft are seeking licenses and beginning exploratory drilling. However, the harsh climate, with prolonged darkness and thick sea ice, poses significant challenges. The operations will require massive investment, as gas pipelines are often impractical, necessitating expensive liquefaction infrastructure at sea. Despite the environmental risks, the financial and strategic benefits drive these efforts.

Sovereignty claims in the Arctic are governed by the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), granting exclusive economic rights within 200 nautical miles of a country’s shore, extendable to 350 miles with scientific evidence. The melting ice has intensified geopolitical tensions among the Arctic Council members, comprising Canada, Russia, the USA, Norway, Denmark (responsible for Greenland), Iceland, Finland, and Sweden. Other nations, like Japan, India, and China, have Permanent Observer status due to their scientific contributions.

Several countries not in the Council argue for their interests in the Arctic, advocating for it to be open to all under the “common heritage of mankind” theory. At least nine legal disputes over Arctic sovereignty exist, some with serious potential for conflict. Russia’s assertive actions include planting a titanium flag at the North Pole seabed and claiming the Lomonosov Ridge as an extension of its continental shelf, contested by other nations.

Russia and Norway have specific disputes in the Barents Sea, with Norway’s claim over the Gakkel Ridge conflicting with Russian interests. Tensions are further heightened by the Svalbard Islands, recognized as under Norwegian sovereignty but with a growing Russian community around coal mining. Russia leverages this population to strengthen its claims, ready to escalate tensions based on geological and demographic arguments.

In response, Norway has prioritized the High North in its foreign policy, regularly intercepting Russian jets and moving its military operations north. Canada and Denmark are also enhancing their Arctic military capabilities. Russia, meanwhile, is constructing new military bases, reopening Cold War installations, and readying a significant Arctic force, including mechanized brigades equipped for the harsh conditions.

Murmansk, Russia’s “northern energy gateway,” plays a strategic role, with President Putin emphasizing its importance for energy supply. Russia’s Arctic military exercises in 2014 involved 155,000 troops, showcasing its capabilities and signaling its intent to defend its interests against perceived threats, notably from the USA, symbolized by the exercise scenario involving an invasion by “Missouri”.

Despite economic challenges, Russia’s defense budget has increased to support its Arctic ambitions, maintaining infrastructure and leveraging its advantageous location. The USA, by contrast, has shown less interest, reflected in its reduced military presence in Iceland and lower overall focus on the region. This strategic disparity highlights Russia’s prioritization of the Arctic, while American involvement remains limited since the end of the Cold War.

Building an icebreaker is an expensive and time-consuming process, costing up to $1 billion and taking ten years. Russia leads the world with its fleet of thirty-two icebreakers, including six nuclear-powered ones. The most powerful icebreaker, capable of breaking through ice over ten feet thick and towing heavy oil tankers, was expected to be launched by 2018. In stark contrast, the United States has only one operational heavy icebreaker, the USS Polar Star, a significant reduction from the eight it had in the 1960s, and there are no plans to build more. The USA’s reliance on a Russian ship for resupplying its Antarctic research base in 2012 highlighted this disparity and demonstrated its lag in Arctic capabilities. Other nations have smaller fleets: Canada has six icebreakers with a new one under construction, Finland has eight, Sweden seven, and Denmark four. China, Germany, and Norway each have one.

The United States faces another issue by not ratifying the UNCLOS treaty, which has left it without claims to 200,000 square miles of Arctic territory. Despite this, it disputes offshore oil rights and navigational access with Canada, which views its waters as internal, while the USA considers them international straits. This dispute dates back to 1985 when the USA sent an icebreaker through Canadian waters without prior notice, causing tension. The USA also disputes with Russia over the Bering Sea, Arctic Ocean, and northern Pacific. A 1990 Maritime Boundary Agreement, signed with the Soviet Union, ceded a fishing region to the USA, but post-Soviet Russia refuses to ratify it, treating the area as under US sovereignty but reserving the right to revisit the issue.

Canada and Denmark have a longstanding dispute over Hans Island in the Nares Strait, with both nations periodically planting their flags on the island. These sovereignty disputes arise from desires to secure military and commercial shipping routes and control the region’s natural resources. The melting ice transforms these theoretical riches into probable, and in some cases, certain assets, intensifying the geopolitical stakes.

The Arctic states and energy companies must now decide how to address these changes, balancing environmental and indigenous considerations with energy demands. The region is poised for increased activity, including more ships, oil rigs, and gas platforms. Russia’s capabilities include not only nuclear-powered icebreakers but also plans for a floating nuclear power plant designed to withstand the Arctic’s harsh conditions.

Despite the competitive nature of this new “Great Game,” there are differences from historical land grabs like the Scramble for Africa. The Arctic Council, composed of mature, mostly democratic countries, provides a forum for decision-making, governed by international laws on territorial disputes, environmental protection, and minority rights. The Arctic region presents unique challenges due to its geography, requiring cooperation on issues like fishing, smuggling, terrorism, search and rescue, and environmental disasters.

Tensions over fishing rights could escalate, reminiscent of the “Cod Wars” between the UK and Iceland in the mid-20th century. Smuggling will likely be a challenge given the new transit routes, and policing the Arctic will be difficult due to its conditions. The increase in commercial and cruise ship traffic necessitates enhanced search and rescue and anti-terrorism capabilities, as well as preparedness for environmental disasters. Historical incidents like the 1965 reactor accident on the icebreaker Lenin, where damaged fuel was disposed of at sea, underscore the potential for such events as the Arctic opens up.

The Arctic could become another battleground for nation states, driven by fear and greed. However, the region’s unique characteristics might also foster different approaches to conflict resolution. The harsh environment requires intelligent and cooperative solutions rather than succumbing to the “cold makes people stupid” mentality, as suggested by Brad Pitt’s character in the film Kalifornia. The Arctic’s future depends on how nations navigate its challenges and opportunities.


Posted

in

Comments

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *