288
Arctic Yearbook 2015
S. Shoigu also noted that developed countries that do not have direct access to the polar regions are
striving insistently for the Arctic. They are taking certain political, military and economic steps in this
direction (RT 2015). N. Patrushev also stressed that Arctic resources are attracting the attention not
only of the Arctic countries, but are also of interest to the EU, China, Japan, South Korea and other
countries. Their interest, firstly, has been determined by natural resources and new transport routes
(Ivanov 2013). But according to S. Lavrov, this will not lead to an “Arctic Race,” because:
International law on Arctic waters clearly determines the rights of both coastal and
other states. This includes access for developing the extraction of mineral resources,
oil and gas deposits, as well as managing marine biological stocks. International law
also regulates the ability of countries to expand the external border of their continental
shelf. Today’s complicated international situation does not create any significant
changes to the established order (Sputnik 2014a).
The same position has been expressed by V. Putin who has said that although many perceive Russia’s
activity in the Arctic with caution and are afraid of it, Russia will act in the framework of international
law (TASS 2014).
Militarization of the Arctic
The discourse around the militarization of the Arctic is the most contradictory, but it arises from the
so called ‘security dilemma’ when an effort by one side to maximize its security increases threats to
the other, thus escalating tension in international relations (Herz 1950). Russia’s increasing military
presence in the Arctic is based on the grounds that other countries pose a threat to Russia. V. Putin
recalled that there are US nuclear submarines along the coast of Norway and that the flight time of
missiles launched from them to Moscow is just 16-17 minutes (Forbes 2013). According to N.
Patrushev, there is regular US Navy and Royal Navy submarine activity in the Arctic, that there are at
least three weekly flights of patrol aircraft, and that about 10 major events in operational and combat
training are planned to be held there every year. The US has also created a united armed forces base
in Alaska, Canada is building a port in Nanisivik and a military training facility in Resolute, and
Denmark has created a united command for the armed forces of the Arctic. N. Patrushev concluded
that in such circumstances Russia cannot just watch war preparations by foreign countries near its
borders (Ivanov 2013). Two years later, S. Shoigu announced that “a permanent military presence in
the Arctic and the ability to protect the state’s interests by means of armed struggle is seen as an
integral part of the overall national security policy” (Shoigu 2015).
A. Vasiliev provided additional pragmatic and more neutral arguments for the increasing military
factor in the Arctic. In his view, the Russian military build-up is based on Russia’s concern with
defending its northern regions due to climate change. Russia has a 20,000 kilometre border on the
Arctic Ocean. Previously, it was a secure border of frozen ice, but it is now melting because of rising
temperatures. Therefore, there is a need to strengthen Russia’s military presence to protect the country
from illegal border crossings, illegal immigration, organized crime and terrorism (TASS 2014). The
position of a US Senior State Department Official during the Background Briefing on the Arctic
Council Preview complements the peaceful discourse of A. Vasiliev, which is intended to underline
Foreign & Domestic Discourse on the Russian Arctic