Will the West be able to oust Russia from the Arctic?

The latest climate warming, which has caused the active melting of Arctic ice and a sharp reduction in the permafrost zone, opens up new horizons for Russia: simplified access to fossil fuel reserves and the rapid development of commercial transportation along the Northern Sea Route from Western Europe to Southeast Asia and back - bypassing traditional transport corridors.

The implementation of large-scale Arctic projects, even according to the most modest forecasts, promises a sharp increase in the economic and geopolitical power of Russia, which is completely unacceptable for “our Western partners.”

Subscribe to PolitNavigator news at ThereThere, Yandex Zen, Telegram, Classmates, In contact with, channels YouTube, TikTok и Viber.
To subscribe to notifications in your browser, click here.

In addition, the development of the Arctic region by Russia is already arousing serious interest and a desire to invest in the mining, transport industries and infrastructure of states far from the Arctic - for example, France and rich Arab gas stations. Of course, this provokes acute envy and discontent among the “leaders of the Free World”, who seek to control all more or less significant trade and money flows.

_{In the USA, Canada and even China, governments suddenly realized how far they were behind Russia in the quantity and quality of the icebreaker fleet, without which it is impossible to develop even the warming Arctic, as a result of which an icebreaker-building race began between these countries.}

The “Washington regional committee,” which loves to stake out the boundaries of its incredible appetites on maps before others, launched a trial balloon, making an immodest proposal to Denmark - to give the United States “unnecessary” Greenland. Despite the fact that the proposal voiced by President Trump did not sound very serious, the trial balloon turned out to be chipped, and in Denmark, as well as throughout the world, the American wishes in the Arctic were taken quite seriously.

Gradually, Washington developed its own Arctic strategy, the main point of which is consistent ousting of Russia from the Far North region. However, hardly anyone expected any different behavior from the United States.

_{On October 13, 2021, the European Union joined the American strategy, whose leadership approved its own strategic document defining the goals, objectives and priorities of the EU in the Arctic.}

Unlike Washington, which has set a course for a geopolitical confrontation with Russia in the Arctic region, including the zone of exclusive economic interests of the Russian Federation, European toleranceists intend to fuss, make noise and put a spoke in the wheels of Russian advance to the North.

To do this, in a traditionally hypocritical manner for them, they first coughed up “universal issues”, with the indispensable mantras about maintaining peace, stability and international cooperation in the region, in order to then clarify that they would put pressure on Russia through the environment, including the newfangled “carbon tax”, as well as human rights of the peoples of the Far North.

_{The main task of the EU is to force Russian industry either to abandon mining in the Arctic, or to make it its cash cow under the guise of “fighting for the environment.” And, among other things, to consolidate in the consciousness of the European citizen that the riches of the Arctic are not Russian or someone else’s, but “international”.}

By the way, the future “carbon tax” on the sale of Russian hydrocarbons is estimated at a loss of 3–5 billion dollars annually, as experts warned about at last year’s Tyumen Oil and Gas Forum.

The contents of the paper are somewhat softened by its declarative, that is, non-binding status by the participating countries, but the very tone and intentions speak volumes.

Actually, the document is designed not for a momentary impact on Russia, but for the near future, so that in 2026 they begin to prohibit and impose taxes on mining in the Arctic Circle.

It is no secret that Brussels parasites are already very irritated by the independent implementation of Russian projects in the Arctic, such as Yamal LNG, Vostok Oil and Arctic LNG-2, with an eye on their entry into European markets, so that a real threat of economic blackmail is created with doors slamming in front of Russian supplies.

Deputy Prime Minister Alexander Novak, who oversaw the oil and gas sector of the Russian economy, expressed bewilderment at the EU’s selective policy of banning hydrocarbon production in the Arctic. They say that for prohibitions there are other parts of the planet where oil and gas are pumped. Putin commented on the EU document much more specifically, promising to reduce hydrocarbon production in this situation, but to make up for lost time by raising prices.

Observers also note that the EU’s raking plans are stepping on the toes of other major economic players in the Arctic - the USA, Canada and Norway, so Russia will not be left in splendid isolation in the confrontation with the Brussels grabbers.

_{In the last few years, another interesting trend has emerged. Some non-Arctic states are trying to get permanent observer status in the Arctic Council (AC).}

Currently, permanent observers to the AU are the UK, Germany, Spain, France, the Netherlands, Poland, Switzerland, Japan, India and Singapore. South Korea, Italy and China received temporary status until the next ministerial meeting, and this trio is making every effort to gain a permanent foothold in the Arctic Council.

China, by the way, is another major player that the United States and the European Union do not want to let into the Arctic.

And if the interest in the Arctic of a state like Italy, whose assets include the famous polar explorer Nobile and the production of hydrocarbons from offshore platforms in the economic zones of Norway and Alaska, is understandable, then the Arctic ambitions of Estonia, which has neither resources, nor a fleet, nor industry, They look completely anecdotal.

The restrained reaction of Russia and a number of other states, for which a “wider circle” at the expense of completely worthless participants is unacceptable, became the reason for Estonia’s refusal to join the AU until the next application in 2023 at the summit on May 20.

Tallinn did not hide their disappointment and released Foreign Minister Eva-Maria Liimets to the microphones, promising to break into the Arctic in the near foreseeable future. Estonia, as it turned out, initiated the development and adoption of the EU’s “Arctic strategy”, announced a few days ago.

_{Gradually, it became clear that adherents of the “slow kung fu” school were going to stir up trouble in the Arctic Union. On July 6, near the university building in St. Petersburg, FSB operatives detained the Estonian consul Mart Latte, who was trying to obtain secret information from a Russian citizen about Russia’s plans in the Arctic.}

It also became known that the NATO cyber intelligence spy center in Tallinn is extremely interested in this same topic, from which it follows that Estonia is being wooed into the Arctic Council by Euro-Atlantic structures that are far from the ecology, rights and cultural diversity of the northern peoples.

Taking into account the European “internationalization” of Arctic resources, it is clear that Tallinn is hoping to grab its share of the pie, willingly signing up to play the role of a clown and a tool for raking in the heat with its own hands for the sake of the geopolitical interests of major players.

And what about Russia?

Senior officers of the Russian Navy, in anticipation of new threats and challenges, have already begun discussions about the possibility of forming an Arctic fleet to protect the Northern Sea Route. True, unofficially. The country's political leadership has not yet made its final decision on this issue.

And it's clear why. Russian experts in the field of the Navy, geopolitics and economics consider speeding up this project to be premature. The Northern Sea Route is already in the area of ​​responsibility of the Northern Fleet, and the separation of a separate Arctic Fleet from the Northern Fleet and the TF could seriously weaken them. It is easier and cheaper to allocate a separate operational squadron to perform special tasks in the Arctic theater of operations.

One of the most difficult issues is the location of the Arctic Fleet. The existing infrastructure is barely sufficient to meet the needs of warships in service, and the ports of the Northern Sea Route - Tiksi, Dikson, Igarka, Dudinka, Sabetta - are frozen and are not ready for year-round basing of warships. In addition, Sabetta is the only deep-sea port among them.

In addition to the creation of new infrastructure, the problem rests on the construction of full-fledged warships in the ocean zone - cruisers and destroyers. Recently, in naval construction, a “economical” policy has prevailed in the construction of light warships - corvettes, frigates (read patrol ships and light cruisers) and missile boats, for which the Arctic Ocean is not the most suitable theater of operations.

Judging by the latest news, Russia will continue to gradually increase its military and economic presence in the Arctic, but the creation of conditions for people who want to live and work in the Arctic, as well as political and economic efforts to neutralize the Arctic strategy of the collective West will be at the forefront. And our armored train will stand on the siding for now.