Divided Arctic in a Divided World Order

Abstract

Arctic order historically, currently, and in the future, reflects world order. The idea of “Arctic exceptionalism” is not valid and is a poor guide for policy. During Cold War bipolarity, the Arctic was divided between the Soviet Arctic and the Nordic and North American Arctic. US victory and Soviet defeat in the Cold War led to US unipolarity and hegemony which was the basis for a circumpolar (including Russia) liberal (as opposed to realist) Arctic order with organizations as the Arctic Council, International Arctic Science Committee, University of the Arctic, Barents and Bering regional cooperation, all on liberal topics as science, environment, Indigenous rights, people-to-people cooperation.<p>

<p>US unipolarity and hegemony is slipping away to world order characteristics of continued US unipolarity and hegemony, Sino-American bipolarity in economics and S&T, and multipolarity illustrated by BRICS+. Sino-US competition and US-Russia conflict to the extent of proxywar in Ukraine reflect these changes. The Arctic, which is de facto divided between the US-led NATO-Arctic and the Russian Arctic, where Russia reaches out to the BRICS+ in diplomacy, economics, and S&T, reflect these changes to world order. <p>

<p>There is wishful thinking in the West of returning to post-Cold War US unipolar and hegemonic “liberal world order” or “rules-based order” and the circumpolar liberal Arctic order with it. This wish is probably unrealistic for global trends in demography, economics, S&T, legitimacy, etc. Significant conflict can be expected between the US/West and China and Russia on developments in world order, with the Global South standing by. The Arctic is likely to remain divided between the US-led NATO Arctic and the Russian Arctic seeking engagement with the BRICS+ world for the future with extremely limited cooperation and risk of spill-over from the Ukraine War and other US-Russia-China conflicts.