Follow us on social

26896891638_b7a2b3887d_o-scaled-e1666985650685

Russian aggression gives US excuse to focus military, and more, on Arctic

In its new strategy, Washington will “seek to uphold international law, rules, norms, and standards in the Arctic.”

Analysis | Global Crises

With Russian aggression inducing a rethink of Arctic policy and strategy among its circumpolar neighbors, and climate change continuing to thaw the polar world at an intensifying pace, the United States has been intensively refocusing more of its strategic and diplomatic attention on the Arctic region, culminating in a series of recent Arctic organizational, policy and strategy updates.

These include the White House’s August 2022 announcement of its plan to establish a new ambassador for the Arctic region, followed in September with the formation of the new Arctic Strategy and Global Resilience Office at the Pentagon.

Then in October, the White House unveiled its new National Strategy for the Arctic Region, updating strategy from 2013 for today’s complex and fast-evolving strategic landscape. As noted in its executive summary, the new Arctic strategy “addresses the climate crisis with greater urgency and directs new investments in sustainable development to improve livelihoods for Arctic residents, while conserving the environment. It also acknowledges increasing strategic competition in the Arctic since 2013, exacerbated by Russia’s unprovoked war in Ukraine, and seeks to position the United States to both effectively compete and manage tensions.”

The updated strategy includes four pillars — Security, Climate Change and Environmental Protection, Sustainable Economic Development, and International Cooperation and Governance. On this fourth pillar, the strategy asserts, “Despite the challenges to Arctic cooperation resulting from Russia’s aggression in Ukraine, the United States will work to sustain institutions for Arctic cooperation, including the Arctic Council, and position these institutions to manage the impacts of increasing activity in the region.” The United States will “also seek to uphold international law, rules, norms, and standards in the Arctic.”

As a headline in the October 10 edition of High North News aptly summarizes, “New US Arctic Strategy Foreshadows Increasing Hurdles for Cooperation in a More Complex Region.”

As described in its introduction, “Despite current tensions stemming from Russia’s unprovoked, full-scale invasion of Ukraine,” the new U.S. strategy “seeks an Arctic region that is peaceful, stable, prosperous, and cooperative” with “guardrails to manage competition and resolve disputes without force or coercion … working primarily with our allies and partners to solve shared challenges.” Russia will continue to be isolated to the sidelines, as its “war of aggression against Ukraine has rendered government-to-government cooperation with Russia in the Arctic virtually impossible. Over the coming decade, it may be possible to resume cooperation under certain conditions. Russia’s continued aggression makes most cooperation unlikely for the foreseeable future.”

Despite newly re-awakened concerns with the challenge presented by Russia to Arctic security, there is still much in the updated U.S. Arctic strategy that is familiar, with an echo of the collaborative dynamic embraced in past American Arctic strategies and policies. Indeed, the new strategy is not the first to note new challenges to the cooperative Arctic, with such concerns finding more prominence in policy statements after Russia’s annexation of Crimea in 2014 and China’s self-declaration as a “Near-Arctic” state in 2018.

Importantly, the U.S. strategy update offers much reassurance on the role of indigenous peoples and perspectives. Two of its four pillars directly address indigenous peoples and their wellbeing. From the Climate Change and Environmental Protection pillar, Washington “will partner with Alaskan communities and the State of Alaska to build resilience to the impacts of climate change, while working to reduce emissions from the Arctic as part of broader global mitigation efforts, to improve scientific understanding, and to conserve Arctic ecosystems.”

As part of the Sustainable Economic Development pillar, Washington has pledged to “pursue sustainable development and improve livelihoods in Alaska, including for Alaska Native communities.” Moreover, the United States “will be guided by five principles that will be applied across all four pillars,” with the very first of these five being “Consult, Coordinate, and Co-Manage with Alaska Native Tribes and Communities,” elevating co-management to a prominent guiding principle for Arctic strategy.

The United States thus remains “committed to regular, meaningful, and robust consultation, coordination, and co-management with Alaska Native Tribes, communities, corporations, and other organizations and to ensuring equitable inclusion of Indigenous Peoples and their knowledge.”

The updated Arctic strategy, with its echoes of more cooperative times, offers a reaffirmation of hope that the Arctic will continue to be a region defined more by cooperation than conflict — even if in the near-term such cooperation is confined to the expanded footprint of NATO’s Arctic members, with Russia excluded. Importantly, Arctic indigenous peoples feature more prominently as partners in America’s Arctic strategy as the 7 democratic Arctic states become more closely aligned within NATO in their collective effort to deter Russian aggression from extending beyond the storm engulfing the Black Sea to the still calm and ever hopeful waters of the Arctic.


BEAUFORT SEA (March 10, 2018) The Seawolf-class submarine The Seawolf-class fast-attack submarine USS Connecticut (SSN 22) breaks though the ice in the Beaufort Sea in support of Ice Exercise (ICEX) 2018. The five-week exercise that allows the U.S. Navy to assess its operational readiness in the Arctic, increase experience in the region, advance understanding of the Arctic environment and continue to develop relationships with other services, allies and partner organizations. (U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication 2nd Class Micheal H. Lee/Released)180310-N-LY160-744 Join the conversation: http://www.navy.mil/viewGallery.asp http://www.facebook.com/USNavy http://www.twitter.com/USNavy http://navylive.dodlive.mil http://pinterest.com https://plus.google.com
Analysis | Global Crises
Trump ASEAN
Top photo credit: U.S. President Donald Trump looks at Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos Jr., next to Malaysian Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim when posing for a family photo with leaders at the ASEAN Summit in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, October 26, 2025. Vincent Thian/Pool via REUTERS

‘America First’ meets ‘ASEAN Way’ in Kuala Lumpur

Asia-Pacific

The 2025 ASEAN and East Asia Summits in Kuala Lumpur beginning today are set to be consequential multilateral gatherings — defining not only ASEAN’s internal cohesion but also the shape of U.S.–China relations in the Indo-Pacific.

President Donald Trump’s participation will be the first by a U.S. president in an ASEAN-led summit since 2022. President Biden skipped the last two such summits in 2023 and 2024, sending then-Vice President Harris instead.

keep readingShow less
iran, china, russia
Top photo credit: Top image credit: Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov and and Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister Kazem Gharibabadi shake hands as Chinese Vice Foreign Minister Ma Zhaoxu looks on during their meet with reporters after their meeting at Diaoyutai State Guest House on March 14, 2025 in Beijing, China. Lintao Zhang/Pool via REUTERS

'Annulled'! Russia won't abide snapback sanctions on Iran

Middle East

“A raider attack on the U.N. Security Council.” This was the explosive accusation leveled by Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov this week. His target was the U.N. Secretariat and Western powers, whom he blamed for what Russia sees as an illegitimate attempt to restore the nuclear-related international sanctions on Iran.

Beyond the fiery rhetoric, Ryabkov’s statement contained a message: Russia, he said, now considers all pre-2015 U.N. sanctions on Iran, snapped back by the European signatories of the 2015 nuclear deal (JCPOA) — the United Kingdom, France, Germany — “annulled.” Moscow will deepen its military-technical cooperation with Tehran accordingly, according to Ryabkov.

This is more than a diplomatic spat; it is the formal announcement of a split in international legal reality. The world’s major powers are now operating under two irreconcilable interpretations of international law. On one side, the United States, the United Kingdom, France, and Germany assert that the sanctions snapback mechanism of the JCPOA was legitimately triggered for Iran’s alleged violations. On the other, Iran, Russia, and China reject this as an illegitimate procedural act.

This schism was not inevitable, and its origin reveals a profound incongruence. The Western powers that most frequently appeal to the sanctity of the "rules-based international order" and international law have, in this instance, taken an action whose effects fundamentally undermine it. By pushing through a legal maneuver that a significant part of the Security Council considers illegitimate, they have ushered the world into a new and more dangerous state. The predictable, if imperfect, framework of universally recognized Security Council decisions is being replaced by a system where legal facts are determined by political interests espoused by competing power blocs.

This rupture followed a deliberate Western choice to reject compromises in a stand-off with Iran. While Iran was in a technical violation of the provisions of the JCPOA — by, notably, amassing a stockpile of highly enriched uranium (up to 60% as opposed to the 3.67% for a civilian use permissible under the JCPOA), there was a chance to avert the crisis. In the critical weeks leading to the snapback, Iran had signaled concessions in talks with the International Atomic Energy Agency in Cairo, in terms of renewing cooperation with the U.N. nuclear watchdog’s inspectors.

keep readingShow less
On Ukraine and Venezuela, Trump needs to dump the sycophants
Top Photo Credit: (Official White House Photo by Molly Riley)

On Ukraine and Venezuela, Trump needs to dump the sycophants

Europe

While diplomats labored to produce the Dayton Accords in 1995, then-Secretary of Defense Bill Perry advised, “No agreement is better than a bad agreement.” Given that Washington’s allies in London, Paris, Berlin and Warsaw are opposed to any outcome that might end the war in Ukraine, no agreement may be preferable. But for President Trump, there is no point in equating the illusion of peace in Ukraine with a meaningless ceasefire that settles nothing.

Today, Ukraine is mired in corruption, starting at the very highest levels of the administration in Kyiv. Sending $175 billion of borrowed money there "for however long it takes" has turned out to be worse than reckless. The U.S. national sovereign debt is surging to nearly $38 trillion and rising by $425 billion with each passing month. President Trump needs to turn his attention away from funding Joe Biden’s wars and instead focus on the faltering American economy.

keep readingShow less

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.