Moreover, the current situation is not due to a misunderstanding, but rather to a clash of the two parties’ interests. More >Ĭonsidering the long-term nature of Russia’s confrontation with the West, the return to the relatively benign geopolitical environment in the Arctic that existed there in the 1990s is unlikely. policy toward Russia in the wake of the Ukraine crisis. Richard Sokolsky is a nonresident senior fellow in Carnegie’s Russia and Eurasia Program. Its only partner in its Arctic pursuits has been China, which claims that it is a “near-Arctic” state-a claim rejected by the United States and likely viewed with suspicion by other Arctic nations. Russia’s actions in the Arctic-its aggressive rhetoric and its far-reaching territorial claims-have done little to improve its diplomatic position there vis-à-vis other Arctic states and only antagonized them. Its rhetoric notwithstanding, it has thus far pursued them through legal means in compliance with the terms of the United Nations (UN) Convention on the Law of the Sea, which it has signed and ratified. Russia has staked out ambitious territorial claims in the Arctic. Yet the Russian military is resuming these missions with fewer resources and facing a more formidable array of adversary capabilities than during the Cold War. Rather, it signals the return to a version of its Cold War–era posture centered around long-standing missions of protecting the sanctuaries of its ballistic missile submarine fleet and operations in the North Atlantic in the event of a war in Europe. Tempting as it may be to view the Arctic through the prism of great-power competition-which undoubtedly would fit with Russia’s quest for recognition as a great power-there is little to suggest that its military posture in the Arctic is a fundamentally new undertaking. Russia’s conception of its security requirements and NATO’s mutual-defense and deterrence commitments on the other hand have resulted in a tense standoff along the alliance’s northern flank as their forces operate in close proximity. More > Implications for the United States and NATO National Intelligence Council, is a senior fellow and the director of Carnegie’s Russia and Eurasia Program. Rumer, a former national intelligence officer for Russia and Eurasia at the U.S. Its ability to achieve these broad ambitions for the region, however, is questionable at best. The Kremlin’s posture in the Arctic is likely to continue as it enjoys backing from President Vladimir Putin and top military, government, and business actors. It is unclear whether the development of the Northern Sea Route (NSR) along Russia’s northern coastline into a major shipping route between Europe and Asia and the associated commercial projects are feasible and sustainable in the face of high costs and logistical complexity of operating in difficult climatic conditions with limited infrastructure, increased commercial competition from other countries, uncertain demand for hydrocarbons as the world shifts to green technologies, and the possibility of additional Western sanctions. Its nuclear and conventional naval forces in northwest Russia are increasingly vulnerable to NATO’s long-range precision weapons. It remains to be seen whether Russia will be successful in realizing these ambitions. Great-power ambitions and the interests of powerful bureaucratic elites and business interests also play a role. The saber-rattling in the Arctic and threatening rhetoric are driven by several factors: preparations for the unlikely, but potentially catastrophic contingency of war in Europe, the need to secure its second-strike nuclear capabilities (the bulk of which is based around the Kola Peninsula), and the quest for resources to pay for the proverbial guns and butter as the competition with the West shows no sign of abating. Modern-day Russian posture in the Arctic is integral to its overall confrontation with the West, in which Europe is the principal theater. Russian interest in the Arctic has deep historic roots that extend all the way to the sixteenth century and the conquest of Siberia driven by the never-ending quest for more resources and secure trading routes. The Kremlin’s rhetoric about Western encroachment has become more strident, in sync with its enhanced military posture and ambitious economic and infrastructure projects. For its part, Moscow casts a wary eye on what it sees as a challenge from the United States and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) to its position and ambitions there. Russia’s Arctic ambitions have attracted increasing attention in the West over the past decade as climate change opens up new opportunities in the region for navigation and exploration of its riches. The Return of Global Russia Executive Summary
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |