Everyone seems to be fascinated with the potential for natural resources under the Arctic at the moment, not to mention the possibility for new shipping routes under melting ice, but what will the future of the region actually hold?
Last month a US not-for-profit organization, the Centre for Climate and Energy Solutions (C2ES), released a report ("Climate Change & International Security: The Arctic as a Bellwether") that outlined three hypotheses for the region and the competing powers — and one of those possibilities is rather alarming.
From the report:
- Hypothesis 1: There is no emerging security environment and the circumpolar states have no new interests that would increase competition or conflict in the region. If this hypothesis is correct, a close examination of the actions of the circumpolar world should reveal no significant new foreign and defense policies and defense procurement decisions in relation to the Arctic.
- Hypothesis 2: While showing renewed interest in the Arctic, the interested states are committed to developing and strengthening multilateral instruments of cooperation. New military capabilities are directed towards building local constabulary capacity and largely eschew escalation of war-fighting capability.
- Hypothesis 3: Increasing accessibility to Arctic resources because of climate change, along with a growing and increasingly modern military presence of strategic rivals in the region, becomes a recipe for competition and potential conflict. Under this hypothesis, the circumpolar states should be actively examining their core interests in the region, expressing concern over what other states are planning or doing in the region, and developing more assertive northern defense postures, including rebuilding their northern war-fighting capabilities. It is also expected that the various actors would be commencing the process of developing new defensive relationships and either strengthening old alliances or building new ones.
Clearly Hypothesis 1 is out of the door, the authors argue, but distinguishing between 2 and 3 is becoming difficult:
While Hypothesis 2 is the preferred outcome of all Arctic states, significant national investments in establishing a modern military capability in the north signals that core national interests are the top priority of most of them. Under these circumstances, competition and conflict (i.e. Hypothesis 3) could become the Arctic reality if cooperative mechanisms cannot keep pace with developments or otherwise prove inadequate to settle international disputes in the region.
Please follow International on Twitter and Facebook.