In the past two centuries, territorial expansion into the Arctic has taken place without the kind of wars and friction that has characterised expansion of national sovereignty in the world’s temperate zones. The underlying reason being that for a long time this polar region was regarded as having limited economic value. However, in the present era, the warmer climate, new technologies for the extraction of hydrocarbons and increasing interest for northern maritime routes are igniting a new great game in the Arctic. It was with this background that in 2007, the Arctic littoral countries woke up to the shocking news that Russia had planted a titanium flag on the Arctic seabed. This planting of the Russian flag by two mini-submarines named Mir-1 and Mir-2 that had dived 4,200 metres below the North Pole was a symbolic move aimed at showcasing Russia’s claim to the territory by proving that Russia’s continental shelf spreads to the North Pole.

The Russian action has set in motion a subtle, yet a conscious process of arming by the Arctic littorals i.e. Canada, Denmark, Finland, Norway, and the US. The North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) has also shown interest in the strategic developments in the Arctic region which has invited sharp reaction from Russia. Interestingly, China has also formulated an Arctic strategy that currently has no military connotations but can be tailored to meet its future needs.

Five different countries border the Arctic but only two international borders, namely the Russian-Norwegian and the USCanadian, run overland, and none of them are disputed. There are, however, disagreements concerning the extension of coastal state sovereignty in the Polar Sea. There is also divergence over Norway’s claim to the continental shelf and the exclusive economic zone (EEZ) around Svalbard islands and between Canada and the US in the Beaufort Sea. In addition, the maritime border between Canada and Denmark in the Nares straits (i.e. between Ellesmere Island and Greenland) is disputed.

The situation is especially dangerous because there are currently no broad political agreements or comprehensive legal structures that can provide for the orderly development of the region or mediate political disagreements over Arctic resources or sea lanes. The Arctic Council formed in 1996 exists to address environmental issues, but has remained silent on security and territorial concerns. Even within the Arctic community, not all nations are perceived as equal. As a case in point, when the Arctic nations met in Ilulissat (Greenland) in 2008, only five were invited. Two Arctic nations, Sweden and Finland, were excluded because they do not have Arctic coastlines. Iceland, which lies just below the Arctic Circle, but would play a large role in the Arctic shipping routes development, was also not invited. The Ilulissat meeting was reminder of the symbolic divide between the Arctic nations, insofar as the future of the Arctic Ocean is concerned. If the Arctic events have the potential to increase tensions over jurisdictional control of the Arctic resources, it would surely result in aggressive postures by nations in the region. The situation, left to it could mutate into an analogy of the Spartly Islands dispute (in South China Sea), where numerous states claim sovereignty but no clear picture of ownership exists.

Russian Federation

Among the Arctic littorals, Russia has been most aggressive in articulating its military strategy for the Arctic region. The Commander of Land Forces of Russia has informed the Federation Council Committee on Defence and Security that there were plans to raise a special motorised infantry brigade for operations in the Arctic. The Brigade is expected to be of about 8,000 soldiers and will be based at Pechenga near Russia-Norway border. Interestingly, the Russian Defence Ministry also noted that the composition and the equipment of the Arctic Brigade were decided keeping in mind the Norwegian and Finnish Arctic forces. Further, the Russian Navy has platforms specifically designed for combat in the Arctic regions. These are based at Murmansk and the Siberian and Far Eastern military districts.

United States

Apart from Russia, it is the US and Canada that have the biggest stakes in the Arctic. With its military budget stretched thin by Iraq, Afghanistan and more pressing issues elsewhere, the US has been something of a reluctant northern power, though its nuclear powered submarine fleet, which can navigate for months under water and below the ice cap, remains second to none. In 2011, the US Navy deployed USS New Hampshire and USS Connecticut (nuclearpowered submarines) in Arctic waters for the ICEX-2011, a series of exercises for Arctic training. The submarines also support the Science Ice Exercise (SCICEX) programme which was started in 1993 and allows the American scientists’ access to spaces under the ice cap which are inaccessible to the scientist community at large. A report by the US National Academy of Sciences has warned that climate change could upset the delicate security balance in the Arctic—even among close allies—and that the US may be unprepared for the challenges ahead. Further, a recent study prepared for the US Navy has warned that the US needs to build up its military readiness in the Arctic where melting summer sea ice is setting up a global struggle for resources.

Canada

Canada’s military regularly conducts three major operations related to the Arctic i.e. Operation Nanook in the Eastern Arctic, Operation Nunalivut in the High Arctic and Operation Nunakput in the Western Arctic. These are joint operations and focus on interoperability and cooperation among various related departments in the north of Canada. Operation Nanook started in 2007 and is one of the major Arctic sovereignty and emergency exercise and involves patrolling, military manoeuvres and oil spill containment exercises.

Norway

In 2009, Norway relocated its Operational Command Headquarters from Stavanger in the south to Reitan outside Bodo in the north, in order to obtain better knowledge of the activities and development trends in the High North to national interests in the region. Norway is transforming its military forces that can be deployed in the Arctic. Besides building the five Aegis capable frigates, a few guided missile patrol vessels and ice-capable Coast Guard vessels are also under construction.

Denmark

The Danish Government announced an Arctic plan for the period 2010-14 and drew plans to spend an additional 600 million kroner (about $99 million) annually, a part of which was meant for enhancing the defence of Greenland and give the Thule base (in Greenland) a central role in its Arctic military strategy. The Thule base has been under the operational command of the US since World War II and it has a monitoring station for the US Ballistic Missile Warning System and also has military satellite ground facilities. The Royal Danish Navy has maintained round the year presence of Greenland supported by Agdlek class patrol vessels. These vessels are specifically designed for surveillance and patrol operations.