- 06 Sep 2019 01:06
#15032041
The Arctic has always been the subject of interest of two world powers - Russia and the United States, because the state that controls it receives advantageous geostrategic superiority. The Arctic is the northern polar region of the Earth, which includes the outskirts of the continents of Eurasia and North America, almost the entire Arctic Ocean with islands. The United States of America is trying to establish its superiority in this region, but in turn, they are again confronted with the interests of their geopolitical opponent, the Russian Federation.
And the buildup of military capabilities and the militarization of the region always lead to a tense situation between these two superpowers, which is of concern to the international community.
An attempt to strengthen the role of the United States in the Arctic can be called the picaresque proposal of Donald Trump, made on August 16, 2019, to purchase Greenland from Denmark, which caused a flurry of criticism from the international community. Representative of the Danish People's Party of Greenland, Seren Espersen, was extremely harsh about this proposal. He stated: If he (Trump - fn.) really thinks about it, then this is the final proof that he is crazy. The opinion about the sale by Denmark of 50 thousand of its citizens to the USA is absolutely ridiculous.
Whatever the idea of adventurous, it all boils down to the fact that the United States is looking for ways to increase its presence in the Arctic. Nowadays, US policy towards the Arctic is based on the "Arctic Strategy" of 2013, and each time it is amended to emphasize how the US is trying to build up its forces in this region. The latest changes to this strategy were introduced on June 6, 2019, which noted the need to maintain the dominant role of the United States in solving the problems of the Arctic, especially in the presence of Russia in the region. A common thread in the published Arctic Strategy of the US Department of Defense is the United States' competition with Russia. And the United States has a strategic advantage, in contrast to its rivals, which consists of the presence of allies and partners with common national interests, which may allow dictating its conditions in the Arctic.
On July 30, 2019, US Air Force General Charles Brown said that the country was considering the possibility of militarizing the Arctic. Obviously, this has not only a political, but also an economic background. Today, the world is undergoing global warming, and this fact is inevitably intertwined with the Arctic region. Melting glaciers are increasingly forcing the US government to pay attention to the vast polar territories as a source of significant oil and gas reserves and a promising transport corridor. The US Geological Survey estimates unexplored reserves of gas and oil at 30% and 13% of the world, respectively. However, despite numerous statements on this territory, the United States needs to recognize that they do not have the resources to develop it. At the moment, there are only 3 ice drifts in the country, one of them in disrepair, and this is an extremely small number for being in the Arctic. If we talk about Russia, then in addition to the extraction of natural resources, it adheres to a course to gradually increase the status of the Northern Sea Route from the national transport artery to the most important international sea route.
Thus, we can conclude that the United States doesn't have the potential to control the Arctic, but the presence of the US military personnel in Alaska allows them to observe quite effective what is happening in the Bering Strait, in the northern part of the Pacific Ocean and in the east of the Arctic, and the presence of a fleet and naval aviation will allow them, if they wish, to deliberately hinder the transport of goods from Asia to Europe and test the strength of Russian defense. It is likely that in the near future the United States will set itself the task of maximizing its position as the Arctic power. It has long been known that where the United States cannot influence with the dollar, they use military force. And the Arctic is just the case now, since Russia has few military icebreakers, and an increase in the number of US polar warships could pose a threat to security and stability in the Arctic Ocean.
And the buildup of military capabilities and the militarization of the region always lead to a tense situation between these two superpowers, which is of concern to the international community.
An attempt to strengthen the role of the United States in the Arctic can be called the picaresque proposal of Donald Trump, made on August 16, 2019, to purchase Greenland from Denmark, which caused a flurry of criticism from the international community. Representative of the Danish People's Party of Greenland, Seren Espersen, was extremely harsh about this proposal. He stated: If he (Trump - fn.) really thinks about it, then this is the final proof that he is crazy. The opinion about the sale by Denmark of 50 thousand of its citizens to the USA is absolutely ridiculous.
Whatever the idea of adventurous, it all boils down to the fact that the United States is looking for ways to increase its presence in the Arctic. Nowadays, US policy towards the Arctic is based on the "Arctic Strategy" of 2013, and each time it is amended to emphasize how the US is trying to build up its forces in this region. The latest changes to this strategy were introduced on June 6, 2019, which noted the need to maintain the dominant role of the United States in solving the problems of the Arctic, especially in the presence of Russia in the region. A common thread in the published Arctic Strategy of the US Department of Defense is the United States' competition with Russia. And the United States has a strategic advantage, in contrast to its rivals, which consists of the presence of allies and partners with common national interests, which may allow dictating its conditions in the Arctic.
On July 30, 2019, US Air Force General Charles Brown said that the country was considering the possibility of militarizing the Arctic. Obviously, this has not only a political, but also an economic background. Today, the world is undergoing global warming, and this fact is inevitably intertwined with the Arctic region. Melting glaciers are increasingly forcing the US government to pay attention to the vast polar territories as a source of significant oil and gas reserves and a promising transport corridor. The US Geological Survey estimates unexplored reserves of gas and oil at 30% and 13% of the world, respectively. However, despite numerous statements on this territory, the United States needs to recognize that they do not have the resources to develop it. At the moment, there are only 3 ice drifts in the country, one of them in disrepair, and this is an extremely small number for being in the Arctic. If we talk about Russia, then in addition to the extraction of natural resources, it adheres to a course to gradually increase the status of the Northern Sea Route from the national transport artery to the most important international sea route.
Thus, we can conclude that the United States doesn't have the potential to control the Arctic, but the presence of the US military personnel in Alaska allows them to observe quite effective what is happening in the Bering Strait, in the northern part of the Pacific Ocean and in the east of the Arctic, and the presence of a fleet and naval aviation will allow them, if they wish, to deliberately hinder the transport of goods from Asia to Europe and test the strength of Russian defense. It is likely that in the near future the United States will set itself the task of maximizing its position as the Arctic power. It has long been known that where the United States cannot influence with the dollar, they use military force. And the Arctic is just the case now, since Russia has few military icebreakers, and an increase in the number of US polar warships could pose a threat to security and stability in the Arctic Ocean.
- By late
- By QatzelOk