Arktis

Climate Change and Arctic Security, Multi-Actor, Diverse and Distributed Assets and Modalities

Klima- og miljøendringer skaper svært varierende operative forhold både for allierte og motstandere. Mens teknologi ofte blir fremhevet som avgjørende for å oppnå strategiske fordeler, er dette ikke nødvendigvis tilfellet i Arktis. Her er det kunnskap som gir strategisk fortrinn, da den som har mest kunnskap, besitter flere strategiske alternativer og kan anvende denne kunnskapen for å oppnå strategisk dominans uten behov for åpen konflikt. For å raskt tilegne oss presis kunnskap samtidig som vi begrenser motstandernes kunnskap, er det nødvendig å forstå deres mønstre for innhenting av informasjon og forståelse. Manglende innsikt i deres handlemønster fører til at vi ikke kan oppdage eller håndtere fiendtlige aktiviteter effektivt. Fremtidig planlegging forsøker å adressere dette problemet, men den mangler presisjon og grundighet for å produsere konkrete resultater som kan anvendes taktisk. Ved å innføre en rammeverk som tar hensyn til flere aktører, distribuerte ressurser og moduser, kan denne mangelen overvinnes.

Considering ecological security from the perspective of Arctic ecosystemic politics

This brief essay is part of a book forum on Matt McDonald's book (2021) presenting the idea of ecological security. In the essay, I reflect on progress and prospects for Arctic cooperation and governance in order to consider the promise and limitations of McDonald’s ecological security framework. The Arctic is an instructive example for such an exploration. The longstanding post-Cold War cooperation in the Arctic is strongly rooted in an appreciation of the interconnected nature of the Arctic ecosystem, even as the governance mechanisms remain far from what would qualify as an ecological security approach in McDonald’s sense. Nonetheless, I suggest that especially two aspects are instructive from the Arctic example. The first relates to how ecological security would potentially interface with an already quite full landscape of governance practices rooted in ecosystems, and associated power political genealogies and effects. The second point is a reflection on unfolding events, seeking to explore how continued inputs from other forms of security governance could impact on emerging or partial attempts to govern with an ecological security perspective. Here, the status of Arctic cooperative governance after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine is an illustrative example to consider. Both points can be read as impediments limiting the applicability of the ecological security framework. However, as McDonald argued, impediments are not the same as absolute limits (2021, 192) and potential obstacles are explored here in the spirit of advancing possibilities for ecological security.

Asia-Arctic Diplomacy a Decade Later: What has changed?

Ten years ago, five Asian states – China, India, Japan, Singapore, and South Korea – joined the Arctic Council as observers. This article discusses how the Asia-Arctic Five’s policies policies and priorities have evolved over the past decade and what their hopes are for the incoming Norwegian chairmanship of the Council.

The Russian Arctic Threat: Consequences of the Ukraine War