The Arctic is one of the most unique and extreme environments on Earth. Located at the northernmost part of the planet, it is home to vast ice sheets, frozen seas, and species like polar bears, whales, and Arctic foxes. For centuries, the region remained largely untouched by human activity due to its harsh climate and inaccessibility.

However, it is rapidly changing, and the reason for this is climate change. Research1 shows that consistently ice-free Septembers could be expected already by 2035. As climate change accelerates the melting of polar ice, vast areas of the Arctic are becoming newly accessible to shipping, resource extraction, and military activity, transforming it into a hub of economic opportunities.

As the world's resources are depleted, taking over a piece of the Arctic means securing a wealthy future. The region is thought to hold2 13% (90 billion barrels) of the world’s undiscovered oil and 30% (50 trillion cubic meters of natural gas) of untapped natural gas. Beyond that, beneath the Arctic's thawing surface lie abundant reserves of rare earth elements, cobalt, and lithium—all essential for the global green transition. And, of course, there are enough sides willing to take advantage of this.

It’s important to note that the Arctic is fundamentally different from its southern counterpart, the Antarctic. While Antarctica is a landmass covered by ice and governed by international treaties that prevent ownership, the Arctic is an ocean surrounded by powerful nations, meaning that as its ice melts, it opens up contested waters rather than unclaimed land.

Donald Trump’s intentions to acquire Greenland are sounding with renewed vigor. Taken initially as comical and outlandish, his proposal to buy the icy island has opened up a bigger picture: the Arctic, once a forgotten, remote, and frozen region, is turning into a geopolitical chessboard where the strategic interests of global powers intersect.

In the twentieth century, the Arctic was essentially divided into several sectors—namely, the United States, Russia, Canada, Norway, and Denmark (through Greenland). According to the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), coastal states can claim an Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) extending up to 200 nautical miles (370 km) from their shores, within which they have rights to explore and exploit marine resources.

Moreover, countries can also claim an extended continental shelf. To do that, they must provide scientific evidence that the seabed is a natural extension of their land territory. This has led to overlapping claims, particularly in areas like the Lomonosov Ridge, a potentially resource-rich underwater mountain range. Russia, Canada, and Denmark all consider it to be the continuation of their territory.

At the same time, the U.S. has never formally ratified UNCLOS, which means the U.S.'s ability to submit formal claims to extended continental shelf areas is limited. Nevertheless, in 2023, the U.S. made headlines3 by unilaterally declaring over one million square kilometers of continental shelf as part of its sovereign rights—an area larger than California. More than half of the area now claimed by the U.S. extends north of Alaska into the Arctic Ocean. The lack of formal ratification of UNCLOS leaves its claims open to international challenge, especially as competition in the region intensifies.

But it’s not only the Arctic-bordering countries that are active in the region. China has taken a particularly interesting stance on the Arctic. In 2018, China officially declared4 itself a “near-Arctic state”—a term not recognized in international law but reflective of its growing ambitions in the region. Chinese state-owned enterprises continue to invest millions in numerous projects in the Arctic that serve the main purpose: to expand their economic influence through resource extraction and the development of new maritime routes.

The most prominent among these is the Northern Sea Route (NSR), which runs along Russia’s northern coast. The Russian government has invested heavily in infrastructure along the route, including ports, search and rescue bases, and surveillance systems. Compared to the Suez Canal route, the northern alternative offers a significantly shorter (up to 40%) path between Asia and Europe.

China, recognizing the economic and geopolitical value of the NSR, has become a close partner in developing the route. Through its Polar Silk Road initiative, China envisions a network of Arctic shipping lanes that complement its broader Belt and Road Initiative.

While the Northern Sea Route runs along Russia’s Arctic coast, the Northwest Passage (NWP) cuts through the Canadian Arctic Archipelago, connecting the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans. The NWP also represents a potentially attractive shipping route if it were to become more accessible for navigation for a longer period of the year. With climate change in mind, the route is thought to rival other global shipping lanes.

However, unlike the Northern Sea Route, the Northwest Passage is the subject of an ongoing sovereignty dispute. Canada claims the passage as part of its internal waters, while the U.S. argues the NWP to be an international strait, meaning ships from all nations should have the right of innocent passage without requiring Canadian permission.

For many years, the Arctic remained on the fringes of global attention. Its harsh climate and thick ice kept most of its vast resources and strategic potential out of reach. But now, as the ice melts and new territories, trade routes, and natural wealth become accessible, the region is rapidly transforming into a space of renewed competition—and potential conflict. What was once frozen and forgotten is now the subject of overlapping claims and rising geopolitical tensions.

This transformation has coincided with an increasing polarization between Russia and NATO states. Russia, which sees the Arctic as central to its national identity and economic future, has heavily militarized its Arctic zone. In recent years, Moscow has reopened Soviet-era military bases, built new radar and missile systems, and expanded its fleet of nuclear-powered icebreakers and Arctic-capable submarines. It has also conducted regular military exercises in the region, sending a clear message about its intentions to dominate the region.

On the other side, NATO has ramped up its Arctic posture in response. Norway, Canada, the United States, and, more recently, Finland and Sweden—following their bids to join NATO—have increased joint military drills in the region, enhanced surveillance, and updated their Arctic defense strategies.

This growing militarization is coupled with diminishing cooperation. Once seen as a rare space for peaceful dialogue—even at the height of the Cold War—the Arctic is now experiencing a breakdown in diplomatic ties. While no Arctic conflict has yet broken out, the region is steadily becoming a stage for a new kind of Cold War.

References

1 Jahn, A., Holland, M. M., & Kay, J. E. (2023). Projections of an ice-free Arctic Ocean. Nature Communications, 14(1), Article 515.
2 U.S. Energy Information Administration. (2008, April 15). Arctic oil and natural gas resources. U.S. Department of Energy.
3 U.S. Department of State. (n.d.). Extended Continental Shelf.
4 Kramer, A. (2018, January 26). A new cold war? China declares itself a 'near-Arctic state'. The Wall Street Journal.