Putin

A resurgent Arctic is part of a resurgent Russia. Putin has declared, “We have no intention of militarizing the Arctic,” but that statement is contradicted by other official statements that define the Arctic as a vital interest and main strategic base in the twenty-first century, by military doctrine dedicated to maintaining Russia’s national interests in the Arctic, and by a whole series of practices—the reopening of bases, the building of airstrips able to accommodate fighters and bombers, and the production of military equipment specifically designed for fighting in Arctic conditions.

Stalin emphasized the importance of the Arctic, seeing it as a source of “colossal wealth,” and used forced labor to extract its resources, a luxury Putin does not have. But the wealth of the Arctic is even more important to Putin that it was to Stalin. It will be his last chance to transform Russia’s riches into greatness and strength. Since he has not sufficiently diversified the economy, the Arctic could well be Putin’s last stand.

Some of Putin’s moves have already made Russia’s Arctic neighbors nervous. Russia is moving forward with a gas turbine–powered armored vehicle called Rytsar (the Knight). A sort of light Arctic tank, its motor is designed to start and operate in the extreme cold and also to travel the long distances between bases and settlements. Drones are already patrolling, especially in the eastern part of the country. Motorized rifle brigades are being formed in the Murmansk region in the western part. The FSB created an Arctic Directorate in 2004, the control of borders always part of that organization’s purview. The list could go on but would thereby create an overly dramatic impression, as do some of the statements of Russian politicians and documents, like the following: “In a competition for resources it cannot be ruled out that military force could be used to resolve emerging problems.”

Russia’s actions in the Arctic, combined with incursions into Ukraine and Syria, have given Russia’s Arctic neighbors some genuine cause for alarm, especially the Norwegians, who also share a land border with Russia. New third-generation Abrams-type battle tanks are now being stored in the huge spaces carved out of Norway’s quartz and slate mountains. In 2010 Norway, the only NATO member with a permanent military base above the Arctic Circle, reopened its mountain stronghold in Bodø, which has fifty-four thousand square feet of tunnels and a five-story-high command center. At this stage, intelligence is still far more significant than the positioning of forces. “If Vienna was the crossroads of human espionage during the Cold War…,” says James Bamford, a columnist for Foreign Policy, “it’s fair to say that the Arctic has become the crossroads of technical espionage today.”

The Russians profess to feel threatened by the extension of NATO to their country’s very borders, a result of former Eastern Bloc countries joining the organization. At the North Pole, however, Russia faces four NATO countries, all of which were members from its very inception. These were not the long-suffering countries of Eastern Europe seeking refuge inside NATO’s castle, but core defenders of Western values and strategies. The Russians know how to rattle the Poles and the Baltic states, but find facing the United States, Canada, Norway, and Denmark a bit more worrisome. Still, with all its military bases and icebreakers—twenty-seven to the United States’ two—Russia is the powerhouse of the north. “We’re not even in the same league as Russia right now,” concedes Coast Guard commandant Paul Zukunft.

That is the basic geopolitical lay of the land, but what matters even more here is the dynamic driving events. For the United States, Canada, Norway, and Denmark the Arctic is important whereas for Russia it has an edge of existential desperation. Since its land-based oil fields are browning, the promised resources of the Arctic could well mean the difference between power and collapse. If Russia loses “the battle for resources,” as Deputy Prime Minister Rogozin puts it, it will also lose “sovereignty and independence.” Those resources lie principally in that immense undersea extension of its territory known as the Lomonosov Ridge. The submersible that planted the titanium flag on the seafloor under the North Pole was not all about propaganda and bravado—it was also collecting soil samples as part of the scientific evidence, including the acoustic and seismic, to support Russia’s claim, which was presented to the United Nations in August 2015, no quick answer anticipated.

And what if the UN rejects Russia’s claim? Then, given the right desperate economic conditions, it will quickly become apparent that for Russia the Arctic is not so much a Mecca as an undersea Crimea that must be seized and annexed in defiance of all law, even at the risk of war.

9 MANIFESTING DESTINY: ASIA