As glaciers rapidly melt and the Northern Sea Route opens up, the Arctic is becoming the site of a new geopolitical confrontation; an “icy Syria” where Russia, China and NATO compete for maritime access, minerals, and strategic depth.
A New Global “Hot Spot”: Tech, Defence, and Trade
The Arctic contains about 22% of the world’s oil reserves and 30% of natural gas.
Global warming makes it possible to open a sea route, that is tens of days shorter than the Suez Passage from Asia to Europe.
In turn, this reduces transportation, by time and fuel, by as much as 40%.
Rare earth elements are also in high demand. Minerals are needed in high technologies, including defense, manufacturing, and “green” energy: two sectors that are increasingly contested in North America and China.
For Russia, the Arctic serves as a resource base, a trade corridor, and a buffer zone; a necessity for the deployment of SSBNs and the protection of the Kola Peninsula. NATO is responding by activating naval bases, drifting icebreaker flotillas, surveillance systems, and sensors.
The ICE Pact between the United States, Canada, and Finland for the joint construction of icebreakers has emerged; a critical response to the growing Arctic presence of Russia and China.
The U.S., Canada, Norway, and Denmark are already tightening their grip on the shipping lanes through the GIUK Gap: a key maritime gateway between Greenland and Iceland.
Russia-China: “Boundless Friendship” in the Arctic
Since 2021, Russia and China have increased their joint activity in the Arctic.
In 2024, military maneuvers were held with the participation of two Tu-95 and Chinese H-6 over the Chukchi Sea and Alaska. Moscow is building fortifications in the Kola region, bases for SSBNs, airfields, radars and coastal missile systems.
Meanwhile, China is Interp Polar Route, sponsoring infrastructure projects and installing a station jointly with Russia in the Arctic.
COSCO and Rosatom signed an agreement on container transportation along a year-round route. This creates a dual purpose, civil and military, posing a threat to NATO communications in the region.
NATO: Arctic Fort after Accession
With the addition of Finland and Sweden, NATO now has a fully-fledged Arctic flank.
The alliance is investing heavily in surveillance systems, drones, icebreakers, and infrastructure. The focus is on training personnel for -40°C, responsive exercises such as Cold Response and Dynamic Mongoose.
The U.S. is funding a well-equipped fleet of icebreakers and drones. In the GIUK gap, Denmark has invested $250 million in radars and frigates with ASW drones.
NATO understands that it needs to maintain control over strategic communications, level up its response time, whilst protecting critical infrastructure.
Future: Economic Potential and Military Leverage
Despite the economic potential of NSR, cargo traffic volumes along the route remain comparatively low: 3 million tonnes of trade pass the NSR compared to 1.57 billion tonnes via Suez in 2023.
Economic statistics do not yet justify large-scale commercialisation.
However, control over the route is more important than profit: it provides a strategic advantage over Russia. If Moscow and Beijing rein in logistics and strengthen naval security, NATO risks finding itself in a defensive position.
Asian Ambitions
Non-Arctic powers, however, are increasing their influence in the Arctic. India, Japan, and South Korea continue to invest in Arctic infrastructure: opening research stations and participating in international forums.
The main motive concerns mineral and logistics access. Asian states view the Arctic as a future global maritime link, a steppng stone for their energy-intensive manufacturing industries and logistics sectors underpinned by export-led growth across ASEAN economies.
The Arctic will no longer be isolated, instead offering another maritime connection whilst bringing with it a new prisoner of it’s own geography.
Explore more articles:
Eurovision: A Platform for Music or Politics?
Poland’s Trajectory: Isolation or Integration After Nawrocki Election Win
