The Arctic is increasing the geopolitical influence of climate change, and it is the cause of world powers’ interest in the territory. Two recent developments have raised the stakes: the United States’ revived interest in Greenland and Russia’s increasing interest in Norway’s Svalbard archipelago. When taken as a whole, these scenarios highlight the growing conflicts and intricacies of Arctic geopolitics, where international treaties, military power, and resource availability clash.
Greenland: The Center of American Aspirations
Under President-elect Donald Trump, the US has rekindled debates on the geopolitical and resource importance of Greenland. Trump’s bold proposal to acquire Greenland is part of a larger American campaign to challenge Russian hegemony in the Arctic. Greenland is an important player in the continuous fight for Arctic dominance because of its undeveloped oil, gas, and vital mineral resources. Trump’s choice for national security adviser, Mike Waltz, recently underlined that Greenland is only one component of the Arctic. Waltz said, “This isn’t just about Greenland.” It has to do with the Arctic. We must take strong action in response to Russia’s attempts to control this area.
However, there are serious ethical and geopolitical issues with this hypothetical situation. Denmark, which is still in charge of Greenland, has a difficult time protecting the island. Greenland has limited defense capabilities due to the overwhelming might of the U.S. military, which is reinforced by its current sites, such as the Pituffik Space Base. The vulnerability of smaller countries in such hypothetical confrontations is highlighted by Denmark’s low military capabilities in the Arctic and its reliance on NATO and EU partnerships. Existing security frameworks are complicated by the possibility that one NATO member could act against another, putting Denmark and its allies in situations they have never faced before.
Svalbard: Norway’s Arctic Flashpoint
Russia’s increasing interest in Norway’s Svalbard island highlights larger concerns in the Arctic, even while Greenland continues to dominate headlines. The Svalbard Treaty of 1920, which grants Norway sovereignty while permitting other signatories, like Russia and the United States, to use its resources, governs Svalbard, which is situated close to important maritime lanes. Russia has increased its presence on Svalbard in recent years by declaring plans for a polar research center and erecting Soviet flags. Norway and its allies are alarmed by these actions, particularly given the growing hostilities between Russia and the West.
Relations have become even more strained as a result of Norwegian attempts to exert control, such as the 2022 sanctions that blocked Russian ships. Tensions already present were heightened when Russia accused Norway of violating human rights. The geopolitical dynamics of the area are further complicated by U.S. criticism of Norway’s supervision of Chinese activity in Svalbard.
Strategic Vulnerabilities and Global Implications
Both Greenland and Svalbard illustrate the strategic vulnerabilities of Arctic territories. For Greenland, the hypothetical U.S. annexation scenario exposes the limitations of international laws and alliances in preventing unilateral actions by powerful nations. Svalbard’s geopolitical importance also emphasizes how difficult it is for Norway to strike a balance between its treaty responsibilities and growing pressure from China and Russia.
Experts caution that hostile statements or deeds in the Arctic could cause instability and justify the use of force to settle conflicts. Andreas Østhagen of the Fridtjof Nansen Institute cautioned that statements like Trump’s could embolden other nations, particularly Russia and China, to adopt similar strategies. Tore Wig of the University of Oslo echoed these concerns, emphasizing Svalbard’s potential as a bargaining chip in Arctic negotiations. “If the U.S. disregards international treaties, as Trump’s comments on Greenland suggest, everything is in play,” Wig noted.
A Path Forward
Amid rising tensions, diplomacy remains the most viable solution to address Arctic disputes. Former Pentagon official Jim Townsend urged nations like Denmark and Norway to engage constructively with the U.S., Russia, and other stakeholders. “Buying Greenland isn’t the solution,” Townsend emphasized. “It’s essential to find out what specifically concerns the U.S. and work collaboratively to address those issues.”
The Arctic is increasingly becoming an arena for great-power competition, with resources, strategic positioning, and national pride at stake. As the geopolitical chessboard shifts, nations must navigate these complexities carefully, balancing national interests with the need for stability and cooperation in one of the world’s most fragile and rapidly changing regions.
Whether through diplomatic engagement or military posturing, the Arctic’s future will depend on how global powers manage the challenges posed by climate change, resource competition, and evolving security dynamics. For now, Greenland and Svalbard serve as stark reminders of the high stakes involved in this emerging frontier of international relations.
In my view, the Arctic has evolved from a cold, far-off frontier to a crucial arena for resource competition, global power dynamics, and strategic posture. Russia’s increased interest in Svalbard and the United States’ emphasis on Greenland demonstrate the region’s growing significance. These events demonstrate the brittleness of international agreements, the inability of smaller countries to protect their sovereignty, and the difficulties in preserving stability in the face of escalating hostilities.
The only practical way ahead as governments struggle with these complicated issues is through diplomacy. Avoiding escalation and promoting sustainable solutions require cooperation, respect for international law, and communication among Arctic parties. Whether the Arctic becomes a theater of conflict or a model for collaboration in a world that is changing quickly will depend on the decisions made today in Greenland, Svalbard, and beyond.
