- The European Union in the Arctic: objectives and challenges - 19 January, 2026
- Italian regional elections: a test for Meloni’s government? - 14 November, 2025
- Sanctions and Strikes: Consequences over Russia - 3 November, 2025
Rather considered a remote and peaceful frosty region, the Arctic region has turned into a centre of the geopolitical struggle. Due to its importance for energy supplies, possible new shipping routes and strategic relevance, the Arctic represents a new core of international politics. Within this framework, mainly three powers have direct interests in this part of the world. The Russian Federation is the first arctic power, thanks to military posture and long tradition of use of Arctic shipping routes. The United States, even if with some delays comparing to Russian capacity, is keen to improve its position in the region. Finally, the People’s Republic of China, away from its non-Arctic geographical position, consider itself as a quasi-Arctic power.
In the current status quo, the European Union comes to the struggle with serious gaps to fill. Indeed, European priorities were different in the past, but with the joining of important countries in the region, as Sweden and Finland, the compass had to shift towards up in the north. Moreover, considering the security issue in Europe with the renewal of tensions between EU States and Russia, the Arctic acquires more relevance.
In addition, the Arctic should be a priority for European Union in the challenge of climate change and the melting of glaciers. In this regard, the issue is twofold. On one hand, the possibility of opening new shipping trade routes in the Arctic for a longer period in the year would mean the removal of the objectives of countering the climate change. On the other hand, this possibility could constitute a possible threat for the southern flank of the Union, because it would mean the reduction of shipping and trade passing by the Mediterranean.
The present article aim to give the reader the coordinates to better understand how important the Arctic is and how the European Union is considering its position withing the region.
The increasing importance of the Arctic
In the next paragraphs the rising importance of the Arctic will be discussed along the two dimensions which are first of all energy and critical resources. In this region many still uncovered resources are assumed. As well as second international trade and the unfreezing Northern Route. Especially the opening of this trade route due to rising temperatures could open new opportunities for international trade routes.
Energy and critical resources
The Arctic contains a substantial share of the world’s natural and energy resources. The region is estimated to hold about 17% of undiscovered global oil and 30% of undiscovered gas. These resources underpin the growing geopolitical interest in the region. Arctic states above all Russia, the United States, and China have differing approaches. Under President Joe Biden, the United States has refrained from promoting fossil fuel exploitation and instead committed to emission reductions. Russia, by contrast, considers the region resource development a central pillar of its Arctic policy. China views the Arctic as significant for its long-term economic growth and has labelled itself a “near-Arctic state,” a strategic framing reflecting its expanding ambitions in the region.
However, several factors limit or slow the exploitation of these resources. Firstly, global ecological and energy-transition goals encourage the shift toward renewable energy sources, reducing the attractiveness of new fossil fuel projects, especially for Western states. Secondly, the supply chain related to the Arctic – the general process of extraction, processing, and transport – demand specialized technology, higher labor costs, and substantial investment, all of which may discourage development. Thirdly, legal and ethical obligations to protect the environment and respect Indigenous communities, who are particularly sensitive to ecological impacts on their territories further complicate full-scale resource exploitation.
International trade and Northern routes
The growing interest in the region founds its key in the global trade balancing. International trade depends heavily on maritime transport, which accounts for roughly 90% of global cargo movement. While the world’s major shipping routes rely on key straits and the Panama and Suez Canals, Arctic commercial navigation remains limited, mainly to short routes serving Russian ports. Yet, the melting of glaciers and the seasonal retreat of sea ice are increasingly opening possibilities for expanded use of these passages.
The Northern Sea Route, running from the Bering Strait to the North Sea along the Russian coast, is currently the more developed of the two routes, benefiting from Russia’s long experience in Arctic navigation dating back to the Soviet era. The Northwest Passage, which connects the North Atlantic to the Pacific through the Canadian Arctic Archipelago, remains less developed due to persistent legal disputes: the United States considers it an international strait, while Canada claims it as internal waters.
Both routes offer a significant reduction in travel distance and time compared to traditional passages through Suez or Panama. For example, using the NSR can shorten travel by about ten days relative to the Suez route. Recent security risks to maritime traffic, such as Houthi attacks in the Red Sea, further increase interest in alternative pathways.
However, several constraints remain. Ice melt currently allows navigation only for a limited seasonal window, mainly from August to October. Moreover, the development of Arctic shipping depends on adequate infrastructure (ports, repair facilities, and refueling stations) which remain insufficient. These particular routes also require ships capable of navigating polar waters, including ice-class vessels and icebreakers.
The European Union, the 2021 Strategy and the securitisation of the Arctic
Facing those challenges, the European Union strategic compass in the Arctic encounters its base in the 2021 updated EU Arctic policy. Specifically, the document specifies the EU position in the region pointing out that:
The European Union (EU) is in the Arctic. As a geopolitical power, the EU has strategic
and day-to-day interests, both in the European Arctic and the broader Arctic region.
A similar expression underlines an important key: the self-consciousness of the EU to be within the region. Even if it appears as a triviality, it gives the Union the tools to try to position itself in the region.
In the original document of 2021, the core of the strategy was a three-pillars system. Firstly, the focus was put on the international cooperation in the region. In 2021, Russia was considered as one of the potential partners to foster this goal. The Ukraine invasion on February, 24 of 2022 changed the landscape and, also in the specific framework, the EU suspended Russia from the activities of regional cooperation. Particularly, this measure was applied for the Northern Dimension policy. Secondly, climate change and the pollution issue remained as a relevant goal. Finally, the possibility of enhancing a sustainable development in the Arctic constituted the third pillar of the strategy.
As underlined before, the Arctic growing interests are set up within the security issue. Russian Federation is the most advanced Arctic power. Its projection is confirmed by the presence of 41 icebreaker ships, which seven are nuclear-powered. The accession of Finland and Sweden in NATO it’s a symptom of a renewal of tensions. The European Union, jointly with NATO and all the partners, should foster its Arctic strategy combining its regulatory and economic powers with the military capacities of the North Atlantic alliance. The new Arctic is a challenge, and the European Union has to fill the wide gap with other Arctic powers.
Questions:
- Will the EU amend its 2021 Arctic policy?
- How dangerous is the Northern Sea Route for European Union countries?
- How advanced is Russia in the competition for the Arctic?
Further readings:
- Laforest, T.J. (1967). Strategic Significance of the Northern Sea Route. In Proceedings (Vol. 93/12/778). U.S. Naval Institute. https://www.usni.org/magazines/proceedings/1967/december/strategic-significance-northern-sea-route
- The White House (2022). National Strategy for the Arctic Region. https://bidenwhitehouse.archives.gov/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/National-Strategy-for-the-Arctic-Region.pdf
- President of Russia (2020). Foundation of the Russian national policy in the Arctic until 2035. N. 164/2020. http://static.kremlin.ru/media/events/files/ru/f8ZpjhpAaQ0WB1zjywN04OgKiI1mAvaM.pdf
