Fragfile Peace in the Arctic

DOI: 10.20542/0131-2227-2018-62-9-97-102

A. Zagorski (, 
Primakov National Research Institute of World Economy and International Relations, Russian Academy of Sciences (IMEMO), 23, Profsoyuznaya Str., Moscow, 117997, Russian Federation 


Despite the current crisis in relations between Russia and the West, the Arctic agenda remains cooperative and constructive. There are numerous examples of progress in regional cooperation over the past few years achieved not least due to cooperation between Russia and the U.S. However, one should not take it for granted that the region can remain immune to the effects of wider politics indefinitely. The longer the current confrontation between Russia and the West persists, the more likely the space of cooperation in the Arctic would begin shrinking rather than further growing. There already are visible signs that the situation can aggravate in the not-so-distant prospective. A sense of increasing political uncertainty spreads among the Arctic countries. This pertains specifically to prospects of a cooperative management of overlapping claims over the continental shelf in the central Arctic Ocean. Particularly in Denmark, concerns are raised that Russia may abandon its previous commitments in that regard and, instead, turn to unilateral action in order to maximize its portion of the shelf through the North Pole. The Russian military build-up, although so far seen as non-threatening by the defence establishment of other Arctic states, also raises concerns as the focus increasingly shifts from assessing Russian intentions towards its capabilities. The suspension of military-political cooperation with Russia in the Arctic does not only arrest the formation of an inclusive security architecture but cements old division lines. Worst case scenarios project spill-over effects from eventual Russia-West confrontation in the Baltics or in the North Atlantic into the Arctic. The danger of unintended escalation of such developments should inform the Arctic countries to take urgent steps in order to arrest further securitization of the region and increase the predictability of their policies and conventional postures there. 


Arctic, Russia, security, military-political environment, military postures, continental shelf 


1. Arctic Imperatives: Reinforcing U.S. Strategy on America’s Fourth Coast. Washington, Council on Foreign Relations, 2017. 83 .

2. Depledge D. Hard security developments. Arctic security matters. Jokela J., ed. Paris, EU ISS, 2015, pp. 59-67.

3. Partial Revised Submission of the Russian Federation to the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf in Respect of the Continental Shelf of the Russian Federation in the Arctic Ocean. Executive Summary. 2015. 36 p. (In Russ.) Available at: (accessed 22.02.2018).

4. Zagorski A.V., ed. Mezhdunarodno-politicheskie usloviya razvitiya Arkticheskoi zony Rossiiskoi Federatsii [International Political Environment for the Development of the Arctic Zone of the Russian Federation]. Moscow, Magistr, 2015. 304 p.

5. Intelligence Risk Assessment 2017. An assessment of developments abroad impacting on Danish security. Copenhagen, Danish Defence Intelligence Service, 2017. 55 p.

6. Capable and Sustainable. Long Term Defence Plan. Oslo, Norwegian Ministry of Defence, 2016. 20 p.

7. Intelligence Risk Assessment 2015. An assessment of developments abroad impacting on Danish security. Copenhagen, Danish Defence Intelligence Service, 2015. 51 .

8. The DDIS Intelligence Risk Assessment 2013. An intelligence assessment of developments abroad impacting on Danish security. Copenhagen, Danish Defence Intelligence Service, 2013. 58 p.

9. Intelligence Risk Assessment 2016. An assessment of developments abroad impacting on Danish security. Copenhagen, Danish Defence Intelligence Service, 2016. 55 .

10. The DDIS Intelligence Risk Assessment 2014. An assessment of developments abroad impacting on Danish security. Copenhagen, Danish Defence Intelligence Service, 2014. 55 p.

11. Agreed Minutes on the Delimitation of the Continental Shelf beyond 200 Nautical Miles between the Faroe Islands, Iceland and Norway in the Southern Part of the Banana Hole of the Northeast Atlantic. Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, 21 September 2006. Available at: (accessed 22.02.2018).

12. The High North. Visions and strategies (2011–2012). Report to the Storting (White Paper). Oslo, Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, 2011. 143 p.

13. The United States Navy Arctic Roadmap for 2014 to 2030. Washington, Chief of Naval Operations, 2014. 43 p.

14. Le Mière Ch., Mazo J. Arctic opening: insecurity and opportunity – IISS. Abingdon, New York, Routledge, 2013. 180 p.

15. Wezeman S.T. Military capabilities in the Arctic. SIPRI Background Paper, March 2012. Available at: (accessed 01.03.2018).

16. Wezeman S.T. Military capabilities in the Arctic: A new cold war in the High North? SIPRI Background Paper, October 2016. Available at: (accessed 01.03.2018).

17. Shoygu reported on the most extensive military build-up in the Arctic among the countries of the world. Interfax, 26.02.2018 (In Russ.) Available at: (accessed 01.03.2018).

18. Norwegian Armed Forces in transition. Strategic defence review by the Norwegian Chief of Defence. Abridged version. Oslo, Norwegian Armed Forces, 2015. Available at: (accessed 01.03.2018).

19. Zagorski A.V. Bezopasnost’ v Arktike [Security in the Arctic]. Contemporary Europe, 2017, no 4, pp. 40-49.

20. Danish Diplomacy and Defence in Times of Change. A Review of Denmark’s Foreign and Security Policy. Copenhagen, 2016. Available at: (accessed 01.03.2018).

21. Danish Defence Agreement 2018–2023. Danish Ministry of Defence, 2018. Available at: (accessed 05.03.2018).

22. Report on Arctic Policy. US Department of State International Security Advisory Board. 21 September 2016. 66 p. Available at: (accessed 01.03.2018).

23. Strong, secure, engaged. Canada’s defence policy. Ottawa, Naitonal Defence, 2017. 113 p.

24. Report to Congress on Strategy to Protect United States National Security Interests in the Arctic Region. Department of Defense, Desember 2016. Available at: (accessed 01.03.2018).

25. Norway’s Arctic Strategy – between geopolitics and social development. Oslo, Norwegian Ministries, 2017. 39 p. Available at: (accessed 12.03.2018).

26. Zagorski A.V. Nestrategicheskie voprosy bezopasnosti i sotrudnichestva v Arktike [Conventional security and cooperation in the Arctic]. Moscow, IMEMO, 2016. 104 p.

27. Klimenko . Russia’s Arctic Security Policy. Still quiet in the High North? SIPRI Policy Paper No. 45, February 2016. 37 p. Available at: (accessed 01.03.2018).

28. Collins J.F. et al. Arctic Council Initiatives to Sustain Arctic Cooperation. Recommendations from the February 2015 Meeting at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. Hanover, NH, University of the Arctic Institute for Arctic Policy and Dartmouth College, 2015. Available at: (accessed 10.03.2018).

29. The First Operational Exercise, Arctic Guardian, of the Arctic Coast Guard Forum (ACGF) held in Iceland. The Finnish Border Guard, 11 September, 2017. Available at: iceland_74229 (accessed 25.01.2018). 

Registered in system SCIENCE INDEX

For citation:
Zagorskii A. Fragfile Peace in the Arctic . Mirovaya ekonomika i mezhdunarodnye otnosheniya, 2018, vol. 62, No 9, pp. 97-102.

Comments (0)

No comments

Add comment

Current Issue
Submit an Article

Dear readers!
Please note that free access to full-text issues of the Journal is being opened at our WEB-site after 6 months of the date of publications.The work on deepening the open archive of full-text issues will be continued.

Dear colleagues, authors and readers!
We kindly request you to turn to editor-in-chief and executive secretary directly concerning reviewing scientific publications in our journal. Only editor-in-chief takes decision on order and publication the reviews!

Dear readers!
This is to inform the researchers of the Institute of World Economy and International Relations that electronic versions of the I, II, III issues of 2020 of French magazine Politique étrangère are now available. Those who are interested, please personally address to the editorial staff of MEMO Journal (room 18-17) with an electronic media.

In response to the challenges of our time the Editorial board continues to open new thematic rubrics:

“World Energy Sector after Pandemic”. We plan to publish articles presenting in-depth analysis of influence of Pandemic on the global energy sector and forecasts of further developments in its various branches.

“Civilization processes of modern development” is a new rubric opened by MEMO Journal in 2020. It will be devoted to the analysis of the influence of civilizational factors and inter-civilizational interactions on the political and socio-economic development of the world at whole, regions and countries.

“Africa today and tomorrow”The rubric devoted to contemporary issues of Africa which is attracting growing interest of the world's leading actors. We plan to publish the articles analyzing the status of statehood, socio-economic and political development of the countries of Black continent, as well as the integration processes between them.


"World Eonomy and International Relations" announces a contest for the best joint academic publications of domestic and foreign researchers and experts in topical issues of the world economy and international relations. The winners will be selected according to the results of peer reviewing and discussion at the Editorial Board. The articles will be published in priority order.


The print version of “World Economy and International Relations” journal is distributed by advance subscription only, and is not offered for retail sale. To subscribe please address to any post office in Russia by referring to the Federal Postal Service Union Catalogue, section “ARSMI”, the journal index is 70542. The subscription may be made for the whole subscription period or starting from any nearest available month for desired number of issues.

To purchase the full-text electronic version of the journal’s issue/article please address to the WEB portal of Scientific electronic library or URL:

In journal
2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | 2014 | 2013 | 2012 | 2011 | 2010 | 2009 | 2008 | 2007 | 2006 | 2005 | 2004 | 2003 | 2002 | 2001 | 2000 | 1999 | 1998 | 1997 |

The author’s opinions may not coincide with the position of editorial