The recent talks between Russia and the United States in Alaska, followed closely by the U.S.–Ukraine–Europe meeting in Washington, may have concluded, but their impact continues to unfold. Where does the Russia–Ukraine conflict go from here? After the Alaska meeting, what kind of new diplomatic contest will unfold among the U.S., Europe, Russia, and Ukraine? Host Ge Anna joins Josef Mahoney, Professor of Politics and International Relations at East China Normal University; Li Yaqi, Research Assistant, S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore; George Tzogopoulos, Director of EU-China Programmes and Senior Research Fellow, at European Institute of Nice. CGTN Radio Melting Ice and Deep Waters Author(s): Ekrem Korkut and Lara B. Fowler Source: Natural Resources & Environment, FALL 2019, Vol. 34, No. 2, Mining the Land, Mining the Sea (FALL 2019), pp. 27-30 Published by: American Bar Association Arctic is not US' backyard Washington's overreaction shows hegemonic mind-set By Zhang Yao In August of this year, as summer temperatures gradually rose in the Arctic, the geopolitical temperature in the region also seemed to climb. The US conducted four consecutive military exercises in the Arctic in July and August, including the key "Operation Polar Dagger" and "Northern Edge 2025." At the same time, Washington hyped up the so-called "China threat" in the Arctic, particularly when five Chinese research vessels were operating in or near the Arctic around Alaska on scientific missions. The US even dispatched Coast Guard ships and aircraft for surveillance and harassment. In recent years, the US has attached increasing importance to the strategic value of the Arctic. Since the Barack Obama administration released the first National Strategy for the Arctic Region in 2013, various US government departments and military branches have issued their own Arctic strategies. The latest of these is the 2024 Arctic Strategy. A common feature of these documents is the growing emphasis on geopolitics and military deployments, while portraying the presence and activities of China and Russia in the Arctic as "threats" to US interests. The US has been continuously boosting its military deployments in the Arctic and increasing joint exercises with its allies. Alaska, the US' Arctic territory, has become one of its most important military bases, hosting many military facilities. It also has more fifth-generation fighters than anywhere in the world. The US Navy also reactivated its Second Fleet, with the Arctic as one of its main areas of responsibility. This further deepens NATO's confrontation with Russia in the Arctic. The Pentagon's 2024 Arctic Strategy outlines core goals, including strengthening Arctic military capabilities, deploying high-tech sensors and radar to eliminate blind spots, and cooperating with NATO allies to operate over 250 aircraft that could be deployed for Arctic Operations by 2030. The document explicitly designates Russia as a security threat while accusing China of expanding its influence in the Arctic. Since the Donald Trump administration took office, Washington's focus on the Arctic has intensified. The US even floated the idea of making Canada the "51st US state." While such ambitions remain fanciful for now, Canada's defense has long been integrated with the US military. For instance, North American Aerospace Defense Command oversees the airspace of both the US and Canada, and radar stations are deployed across Canada and Greenland. Recently, Denmark signed an agreement with the US that, while maintaining sovereignty over Greenland, effectively allows Washington to expand its defense presence on the island with few restrictions. Not long ago, a US nuclear submarine docked for the first time in history in Reykjavik, the capital of Iceland. The Trump administration's renewed Arctic focus stems partly from economic considerations: The US has long emphasized traditional energy development and its associated benefits. With Europe cutting energy ties with Russia following the Ukraine conflict, it has been forced to import costly US energy, and the Arctic's abundant resources fit neatly into US' energy agenda. Moreover, about 80 percent of US rare earth imports come from China, which Washington views as a strategic vulnerability in its trade rivalry with Beijing. Thus, tapping into the Arctic's rare earth potential has become part of the US' long-term strategic considerations. Strategically, enhancing US military deployments in the Arctic and seeking military superiority there are also important tools for containing Russia. As the US increasingly views the Arctic as an arena of great-power competition and relies ever more heavily on military means to maintain its dominance, the region has gradually become a new hotspot of geopolitical confrontation. This has heightened tensions and raised the risks of conflict. Although the US seems intent on treating the Arctic as its hegemonic preserve, under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea and other relevant international treaties, China and all other countries are fully entitled to conduct scientific research and other legitimate activities in the Arctic. The US' overreaction to the activities of China and others in the region ultimately reflects a classic hegemonic mindset. The Arctic is not America's private domain. NB: The author Zhang Yao is deputy director of the Academic Committee and senior researcher of Shanghai Center for RimPac Strategic and International Studies. China Military Get full access to Global Polarity at globalpolarity.substack.com/subscribe
