Russian invasion of Ukraine disrupts delicate, depoliticized balance in Arctic

(MENAFN) The Russian invasion of Ukraine has disrupted the delicate, often depoliticized balance in the Arctic, and Donald Trump’s actions may be pushing it further off course. His renewed focus on Greenland raises concerns over the potential militarization and politicization of the Arctic, threatening both regional stability and scientific collaboration. In 2019, trump made an unexpected proposal to purchase Greenland, a move whose motivation remains unclear. The U.S. had previously attempted to acquire the territory after World War II, seeking to gain a strategic advantage. By 2021, after Trump left office, the Greenland saga seemed like an odd chapter in foreign policy history. Greenland, under Prime Minister Kim Kelsen, dismissed the idea, stating that the island was "not for sale," but still "open to business."

Now, Trump’s rhetoric on Greenland has intensified, calling control of the island “absolutely necessary.” Some might argue that Trump is simply using his usual dramatic political flair to rally his base, as he often makes bold statements that spark debate. For instance, during a press conference in January, Trump even proposed renaming the Gulf of Mexico as "America’s Bay." Given Trump's background as a real estate mogul, it’s not difficult to see why he might be interested in Greenland. The island is often exaggerated in size on maps, and in 2019, Trump referred to the potential acquisition as a "huge real estate deal." However, during his first term, he largely overlooked the Arctic's strategic importance.

This leads to a second possibility: Trump might be playing a strategic game. The U.S. military already recognizes Greenland's crucial position, especially for monitoring Russian and Chinese military movements. Additionally, the region is rich in valuable resources. While it seems unlikely that Trump will attempt to buy or invade Greenland, the growing focus on the Arctic, especially by Trump and his advisers, is worrying. This shift could determine whether the region remains a hub for scientific research and economic activity or becomes a highly militarized and politicized area. When I began following Arctic issues nearly a decade ago, it was considered an "exceptional place," largely insulated from geopolitical tensions. The Arctic Council and other international organizations fostered cooperative scientific and technical efforts between all Arctic nations, including Russia and the U.S. But the growing interest in militarization could undermine this collaborative spirit and reshape the Arctic's future.

MENAFN28012025000045015687ID1109137922