Follow us on social

google cta
US Navy Arctic

The rising US-NATO-Russia security dilemma in the Arctic

It's been a hot summer for tense military maneuvers in the cold Barents Sea. What's it all for?

Analysis | North America
google cta
google cta

An ongoing Great Power tit-for-tat in which U.S./NATO and Russian warships and planes approach each other’s territories in the Arctic, suggests a sense of growing instability in the region.

This uptick in military activities risks the development of a security dilemma: one state or group of states increasing their security presence or capabilities creates insecurity in other states, prompting them to respond similarly.

The most recent example is a recent U.S.-Norwegian joint patrol on Russia’s maritime border in the Barents Sea. The August 29 operation marks the third time in five years that the U.S. Navy has entered the Barents Sea. In 2020, the U.S. Navy had entered this region for the first time since the 1980s.

“Credible naval forces operating in the Arctic ensure the ability to deter competitors and rapidly respond to crises in the region,” U.S. Fleet Forces Command wrote about the most recent operation.

The U.S. Arleigh Burke-class guided missile destroyers USS Mahan (DDG 72) and USS Bainbridge (DDG 96), Royal Norwegian Navy Fridtjof Nansen-class frigate HNoMS Thor Heyerdahl (F-314), and Royal Norwegian replenishment oiler HNoMS Maud (A-530), took part in the maneuvers. The flotilla is part of a group supporting the USS Gerald R. Ford, the world’s largest aircraft carrier.

One week before the U.S.-Norway patrol, U.S., U.K. and Norwegian P-8 Poseidon anti-submarine warfare (ASW) planes responded to a potential threat from Russian Yasen-class attack submarines spotted around the USS Gerald R. Ford in the Norwegian and North Seas. The Yasen class is Russia’s newest nuclear-powered cruise missile submarine. They are designed to carry the Zircon hypersonic cruise missile.

The Barents Sea is in the European Arctic and divided between Russian and Norwegian territorial waters. The area is militarily sensitive for Russia as it is home to several Russian strategic air bases as well as the headquarters of the Northern Fleet. The Barents region was the setting for two invasions of Russia by Western troops in the twentieth century: British, American, and French troops intervened in the Russian Civil War by occupying Murmansk and Arkhangelsk, and Nazi Germany and Finland invaded the Soviet Arctic during World War II.

Countering Russia and China

President Trump’s rhetoric on acquiring Greenland and Russian and Chinese ships “all over the place” near that island, coupled with the 2025 Annual Threat Assessment (in which the Arctic is mentioned 14 times), demonstrates that the U.S. regards the Arctic as a strategic priority.

Official documents, including the 2024 Pentagon Arctic Strategy, draw attention to Russian and Chinese activities, and the two countries’ cooperation, in the Arctic as the top threats to regional stability.

In recent years, Russia and China have indeed been increasing their security cooperation in the Arctic, too.

In July 2024, Russian and Chinese bombers conducted joint drills over the Chukchi and Bering Seas and the northern Pacific Ocean, marking the eighth patrol since 2019 and the first within Alaska’s Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ). The aircraft did not enter U.S. or Canadian sovereign airspace and were not seen as a threat, according to NORAD.

In September 2024, the Russian Navy and China’s People's Liberation Army Navy carried out their largest joint naval exercises since the 1990s, dubbed “Ocean-2024.” The return of such “Cold War-era practices” was reported by Russian media as a response to rising tensions with the U.S.

These exercises spanned the Pacific and Arctic Oceans, as well as the Mediterranean, Caspian, and Baltic Seas. The U.S. Army deployed troops and rocket launchers to the far tip of Alaska as a reacting show of force.

Norway as NATO’s “tip of the spear”

The U.S.-Norway operation is just the latest development that shows the Arctic is becoming a more geopolitically significant region for the U.S. and NATO. On August 9, NATO Joint Air Command announced the deployment of three B-1B Lancer strategic bombers of the U.S. Air Force to the Ørland Air Base in Norway. The announcement came shortly after the U.S. sent a WC-135R “nuke sniffer” aircraft close to Russia's strategic bases in the Barents region.

On August 31, 2025, Norway and the U.K. signed a strategic partnership agreement that includes the purchase of at least five frigates “to better counter Russia on NATO’s northern flank.” The deal is Norway’s biggest ever military investment, valued at almost $14 billion. Russian diplomats argue that NATO’s efforts to militarize the Arctic are primarily driven by the U.K.

At the end of August 2025, U.S. aircraft made four interceptions of Russian surveillance flights day off the coast of Alaska. NORAD announced that such Russian activity happens regularly and is not seen as a threat. On September 3, 2025, an RQ-4 Global Hawk remote-operated surveillance drone flew along the Norwegian and Finnish borders with Russia, flying over Norway’s Finnmark region for the first time. Thomas Nilsen of the Barents Observer described the “highly unusual move” as a Strategic Communication to Russia.

Diplomatic Solutions

This dangerous spiral demonstrates the need for restraint and diplomatic solutions. These include confidence building measures, military-to-military dialogue, trust-building, and additional measures to reduce the risk of escalation in the region. Such measures are necessary to clarify the intentions behind peace-time military activities.

The availability of complete Automatic Identification System (AIS) data during military exercises in the region would be one such measure to improve transparency. Another could be the establishment of a military code of conduct for the Arctic to define what is tolerable and unacceptable military activity in the region.

Competition between the U.S. and Russia in the Arctic should not be considered an imperative. The Cold War is over. We should be leaning into opportunities that normalize U.S.-Russia relations, not make existing tensions permanent.


Top photo credit: Cmdr. Raymond Miller, commanding officer of the Arleigh Burke-class guided-missile destroyer USS Bainbridge (DDG 96), looks out from the bridge wing as the ship operates with Royal Norwegian replenishment oiler HNoMS Maud (A-530) off the northern coast of Norway in the Norwegian Sea above the Arctic Circle, Aug. 27, 2025. (U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist 3rd Class Cesar Licona)
google cta
Analysis | North America
nuclear weapons
Top image credit: rawf8 via shutterstock.com

What will happen when there are no guardrails on nuclear weapons?

Global Crises

The New START Treaty — the last arms control agreement between the U.S. and Russia — is set to expire next week, unless President Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin make a last minute decision to renew it. Letting the treaty expire would increase the risk of nuclear conflict and open the door to an accelerated nuclear arms race. A coalition of arms control and disarmament groups is pushing Congress and the president to pledge to continue to observe the New START limits on deployed, strategic nuclear weapons by the US and Russia.

New START matters. The treaty, which entered into force on February 5, 2011 after a successful effort by the Obama administration to win over enough Republican senators to achieve the required two-thirds majority to ratify the deal, capped deployed warheads to 1,550 for each side, and established verification procedures to ensure that both sides abided by the pact. New START was far from perfect, but it did put much needed guardrails on nuclear development that reduced the prospect of an all-out arms race.

keep readingShow less
Trump Hegseth Rubio
Top image credit: President Donald Trump, joined by Secretary of War Pete Hegseth, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, and Secretary of the Navy John Phelan, announces plans for a “Golden Fleet” of new U.S. Navy battleships, Monday, December 22, 2025, at the Mar-a-Lago Club in Palm Beach, Florida. (Official White House Photo by Daniel Torok)

Trump's realist defense strategy with interventionist asterisks

Washington Politics

The Trump administration has released its National Defense Strategy, a document that in many ways marks a sharp break from the interventionist orthodoxies of the past 35 years, but possesses clear militaristic impulses in its own right.

Rhetorically quite compatible with realism and restraint, the report envisages a more focused U.S. grand strategy, shedding force posture dominance in all major theaters for a more concentrated role in the Western Hemisphere and Indo-Pacific. At the same time however, it retains a rather status quo Republican view of the Middle East, painting Iran as an intransigent aggressor and Israel as a model ally. Its muscular approach to the Western Hemisphere also may lend itself to the very interventionism that the report ostensibly opposes.

keep readingShow less
Alternative vs. legacy media
Top photo credit: Gemini AI

Ding dong the legacy media and its slavish war reporting is dead

Media

In a major development that must be frustrating to an establishment trying to sell their policies to an increasingly skeptical public, the rising popularity of independent media has made it impossible to create broad consensus for corporate-compliant narratives, and to casually denigrate, or even censor, those who disagree.

It’s been a long road.

keep readingShow less
google cta
Want more of our stories on Google?
Click here to make us a Preferred Source.

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.