by Andrey Musalov
[REGNUM] Against the background of a special military operation in Ukraine, many other aspects of the confrontation between Russia and the countries of the collective West remained in the shadows. Meanwhile, one of them has long been the struggle for the Arctic region.
_poster.jpg)
In the 90s, the vacuum that arose in the former Soviet Arctic was quickly filled by numerous countries of the so-called “Arctic Club”: the USA, Canada, Denmark, Norway, etc.
Representatives of these countries adhere to the point of view that Russia does not have the right to control its territories of the Arctic and Siberia alone, and propose dividing these riches “fairly.” The reason is obvious: over the past decades, large deposits of natural resources have been discovered in the Arctic region.
According to the US Geological Survey, up to 20% of the world's hydrocarbon reserves are located in the Arctic Ocean: potential gas reserves are estimated at 47.3 trillion cubic meters. m, gas condensate - 44 billion barrels, oil - 90 billion barrels.
These are decisive factors for a possible geostrategic confrontation between countries laying claim to the Arctic region.
LOST POSSESSIONS
For a long time, the polar possessions of the USSR were determined by the sectoral principle of dividing the Arctic. In the west, the maritime border of the sector ran from the northern point of the Russian-Norwegian border on the Rybachy Peninsula - a triangulation mark on Cape Kekursky to the North Pole. In the east - from the strait that separated the Soviet Ratmanov Island from the American Kruzenshtern, to the North Pole.
This milestone was secured by a resolution of the Presidium of the USSR Central Executive Committee of 1926. Norway, Denmark, Canada and the USA had their own sectors, but the Soviet one was the largest.
The situation changed in 1997. The government of Boris Yeltsin ratified the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea of 1982, according to which the maritime economic boundaries of states are limited to a 200-mile coastal zone without recognizing priority over the remaining territories of the Arctic sector, which previously belonged to the polar possessions of the USSR.
As a result, our country lost the right to own the “Russian Arctic triangle”. Vast areas beyond 200 miles from the coast were declared zones of free navigation, to which Russia no longer had the right to lay claim, as well as to the natural resources located there.
It is noteworthy that a number of countries either refused to ratify the Convention on the Law of the Sea or did not sign it at all. First of all, we are talking about the United States, which not only did not sign the document, but also declared that the continental shelf is a continuation of the country’s land territory. Accordingly, they did not recognize waters beyond the 200-mile zone as areas of free navigation.
This applied to the Atlantic, Pacific and, of course, the Arctic, where the United States claims an area of 1 million square meters of the Bering Sea. As a result, a number of other countries began to consider the continental shelf as an extension of their lands under water.
WHOSE RIDGE?
In 2001, Russia submitted an application to the UN to expand its Arctic economic zone on the basis that the Lomonosov Ridge is a continuation of the Russian continental shelf and a direct continuation of the Eurasian continent, and therefore is Russian territory.
The Lomonosov Ridge stretches 1,800 kilometers across the entire center of the Arctic Ocean - from the Russian-owned New Siberian Islands to the Canadian Ellesmere Island.
Satisfaction of the application would allow Russia to justify its rights to more than 1.2 million square meters. km of ocean shelf - from Chukotka to the Kola Peninsula. The Arctic shelf is rich in oil, gas and other mineral reserves. According to some estimates, from 83 to 110 billion tons of hydrocarbons in oil equivalent are concentrated here (16 billion tons of oil and more than 82 trillion cubic meters of gas).
There are also deposits of tin, nickel, lead, manganese, gold, platinum and other valuable metals on the shelf. As ice melts due to global warming, supplies become more accessible every year. It is not surprising that in addition to Russia, Canada, Iceland, Norway, Sweden, Finland and Denmark are also laying claim to this tidbit of the Arctic.
At the same time, most of the countries participating in the Arctic process have territorial claims against Russia. The United States, for example, lays claim to Russia's Wrangel Islands, arguing that they are an extension of the Alaskan continental shelf.
In 2002, the UN Commission rejected Russia's application "for lack of evidence." It was noted that the data contained in it requires clarification. The commission recommended that the Russian side conduct more detailed studies.
To confirm that the underwater Lomonosov and Mendeleev ridges are a continuation of the Siberian continental platform, a Russian deep-sea research expedition led by oceanographer and polar explorer Artur Chilingarov set off for the Arctic in 2007.
On August 2, the expedition made the first ever dive of manned vehicles onto the ocean floor near the North Pole. At the same time, the bathyscaphe "Mir-1" plunged to a depth of 4261 meters, "Mir-2" - to 4302 meters.
During the dive, scientists collected samples of bottom sediments and rocks, and also installed a Russian flag made of titanium on the ocean floor, and with it a capsule with a message to future generations.
Based on a study of data collected by the Arctic-2007 expedition, Russian scientists confirmed that the Lomonosov Ridge is a continuation of the Siberian continental plate.
As one might expect, politicians in competing states reacted with irritation to Russian research. US State Department spokesman Tom Casey said that it does not matter to him “what the Russians left on the ocean floor - a flag or a metal plate.” According to him, Russia's actions had no legal basis.
In turn, Canadian Foreign Minister Peter MacKay said that the Russian deep-sea expedition was nothing more than a show, and only in the Middle Ages it was possible to claim rights to the occupied territory after planting the flag. Other countries in the Arctic zone, Denmark, Sweden and Norway, expressed solidarity with the position of the United States and Canada.
In response, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said that the Russian expedition was carried out in accordance with international maritime law, and its goal - to determine the ownership of the continental shelf - was announced in advance.
Commenting on Mackay's statement, the minister noted: “When explorers reach undiscovered territory, they leave flags behind. This is exactly what the Americans did on the Moon."
In general, Russia’s desire to solve the problem of the Arctic shelf using evidence-based scientific methods has brought results. In 2014, the UN Commission partially satisfied the Russian application, recognizing the section of the continental shelf in the Sea of Okhotsk as part of the territory of the Russian Federation. We are talking about an area of over 50 thousand square meters. km, which is a continuation of the Siberian continental platform.
In response to this, the then Prime Minister of Canada Stephen Harper said: The North Pole is on primordially Canadian territory, since the Lomonosov Ridge does not come from the Russian shelf, but is an underwater continuation of the northern Canadian Ellesmere Island.
Harper was supported by Environment Minister Leona Aglukkaq, the first Eskimo woman in the Canadian cabinet. In one of her speeches, she categorically stated: “At the North Pole we define Canada’s last border!”
CONFRONTATION AMONG THE ICE
Throughout the last decade, despite the desire of the Russian side for a constructive resolution of disputes, some of the states of the “Arctic Club” have been straining relations with Russia.
At first, it was about one-time demonstrative actions of non-governmental organizations, such as provocations by Greenpeace activists (an organization recognized as undesirable in the Russian Federation) at the Russian Prirazlomnaya platform. But soon such actions became systemic and reached the state level.
Norway has been more active than others, whose coast guard has repeatedly detained and inspected Russian fishing vessels in areas of the Barents Sea, which over the last century were considered joint fishing areas. More than once Russian fishermen were arrested and transported to Norwegian ports.
In response to the activity of the states of the collective West in the Arctic, Russia began to strengthen its presence in the region.
The Ministry of Defense first announced the need to build up military potential on the Northern Sea Route in March 2011. At the same time, the Russian Security Council adopted the “Fundamentals of the state policy of the Russian Federation in the Arctic for the period until 2020 and beyond.”
In December 2014, specifically to protect Russia’s strategic and economic interests in the Arctic, the Northern Fleet Joint Strategic Command (USC) was formed with headquarters in Severomorsk. Its main task is to protect Russia’s economic interests in the Arctic region, from Murmansk to Anadyr.
The unified command includes the surface and submarine forces of the Northern Fleet, naval aviation, coastal troops and air defense. In the same year, airfields in Tiksi, Naryan-Mar, Nagurskoye, Anadyr, Rogachevo and other cities were quickly reconstructed.
The next step was the creation in 2015 of six military bases, of which the most remote were “Northern Clover” on Kotelny Island (in the center of the Northern Sea Route) and “Arctic Trefoil” on the island of Alexandra Land. These are closed-cycle military camps with a power plant, boiler room and other life support systems.
As troops build up, the air defense of the area is also strengthened. The Arctic air defense units are represented today by the 45th Air Force and Air Defense Army, which includes a powerful formation - the 1st Air Defense Division.
Also in 2015, the formation of motorized rifle Arctic brigades began to operate in the Far North. The first formation to operate in the Arctic was to be formed on the basis of the 200th motorized rifle brigade, which is stationed in Pechenga.
In developing the concept of protecting Russia’s interests in the Arctic region, on March 12, 2020, the State Duma in the first reading adopted the bill “On state support for business activities in the Arctic zone of the Russian Federation.” The document defines the legal regime according to which business activities should be conducted in the Arctic zone, and also spells out state support measures that will be applied to areas of the Russian Arctic shelf that will be determined by the Cabinet of Ministers.
Of course, the increase in Russia’s presence in the Arctic region did not go unnoticed by the countries of the collective West. In the American “Strategy for Cooperation on Naval Forces of the 21st Century,” a document that is a conceptual plan for the development of the US Navy, the situation in the Arctic is included in the list of “challenges of a new era.”
The US military regularly conducts exercises in the region, often jointly with other members of the North Atlantic Alliance.
In mid-February 2020, the head of the Northern Command of the US Armed Forces, Terrence O'Shaughnessy, said that the United States fears the expansion of influence in the Arctic by Russia and China, which intend to “exploit the economic potential” of the region. The Ice Exercise (IceX), a biannual exercise, responded to concerns.
As part of the exercises in the Alaska region, the American command demonstrates to Russia and China the operational readiness of the United States and allied countries to operate in the Arctic. At the same time, the US military is creating a Seadragon camp on the ice fields of the Beaufort Sea, and Los Angeles-class submarines of the US Navy are practicing surfacing with breaking through the ice and a subsequent training attack.
The last Ice X exercise to date took place on March 8, 2024.
FROM WORDS TO DEEDS
With the start of the Northern Military District in Ukraine, members of the Arctic Council - the USA, Canada, Denmark, Iceland, Norway, Finland and Sweden - declared a boycott of Russia. They created the “7+1” format and hold meetings without the participation of Moscow, ignoring its opinion on all issues. At the same time, State Department representative Derek Chollet said that 70% of problems in the Arctic can be solved without the participation of the Russian Federation.
The most striking example of the growth of confrontation in the Arctic was the actual blockade in the spring-summer of 2022 of the Russian village of Barentsburg, located on the Spitsbergen archipelago.
Then, as part of anti-Russian sanctions, the Norwegian authorities rejected Russia’s application to allow cargo for our citizens to pass through the Storskog checkpoint, the only checkpoint on the Russian-Norwegian border. As a result, 450 miners from the Arktikugol trust and about 50 employees of travel companies were on the verge of starvation.
The validity of the Treaty of Paris, signed in 1920, was called into question. According to the document, Norwegian sovereignty was established over the archipelago, but the Soviet Union, and then its successor Russia, could use its natural resources.
In response, Russia threatened to denounce the agreement between the Russian Federation and Norway on the delimitation of maritime spaces and cooperation in the Barents Sea and the Arctic Ocean. This had an effect: in order to circumvent its own sanctions, Norway undertook to deliver Russian cargo to Spitsbergen using its own ships.
It is difficult to say what scenario the further confrontation in the Arctic will follow. It is important to note that only Russia has a developed icebreaker fleet and large-scale military infrastructure in the region.
However, it is obvious that further global warming, the discovery of large mineral deposits in the region and the growing need to use the Northern Sea Route will strengthen the desire of the collective Western countries to push Russia out of the polar regions. And at any cost.
| Yes, but what if there is no significant global warming, and therefore no Northern Sea Route? |