Russian Certainty of NATO Hostility: Repercussions in the Arctic

Abstract

How does a security dilemma dynamic between parties deemed not to hold hostile intentions toward each other emerge and escalate? This article investigates Russian official discourse on NATO engagement in Europe post-Crimea (2014), and its impact on security interaction in the Arctic. We also examine how Russia represents NATO intentions and actions in a context seen by Russia as a relation of war. We identify the effect of these changing representations of self and other for the emerging securitization dilemma in relations between Russia and NATO, arguing that they have replaced uncertainty about NATO’s hostile intentions with certainty. Although Russia still articulates the Arctic as a unique cooperative region, there may be little space left for non-conflictual Russian action when encountering NATO in the Arctic. We highlight the agency and importance of evolving political rhetoric in creating a dangerous situation where lethal conflict can occur between parties who do not seek it, and also suggest that adjustments to patterns of official speech could be a tool of mitigation.

Greenland in Arctic Security

“…Watson (2013) has shown how the Cold War macrosecuritization hierarchized numerous other security issues in the Canadian Arctic, which enabled securitizing actors to successfully point to threats in one sector as constituting a threat to a referent object in another sector, thereby resulting in a 'securitization dilemma.' In that perspective, Wilhelmsen and Hjermann (2022) find that Russian rhetoric over the past decade makes it difficult avoiding the conclusion that the Arctic is sliding back into a similar configuration.…”

Russia’s Arctic policy: Upcoming change?

“…Firstly, a large part of the literature focuses on Russia’s military build-up in the Arctic and how to deal with it (see, for example, Åtland, 2018; Boulègue, 2019; Kjellén, 2022; Melino & Conley, 2020; Odgaard, 2022; Zysk, 2020) and the question of whether Russia is a status-quo or a revisionist power in the region (see, for example, Grajewski, 2017; Konyshev & Sergunin, 2014). Some of the studies focus on whether there is a security dilemma building in the Arctic (see Åtland, 2014; Kjaergaard, 2018; Wilhelmsen & Hjermann, 2022; Wither, 2021). For detailed studies on the nuclear weapons of Russia’s Northern Fleet, see (Zysk, 2015).…”

Innledning. Fokus: Krigen og forskningen

“…Dette gjelder også Russland (se f.eks. Wilhelmsen & Hjermann, 2022). Putins essay sommeren 2021 er en dyster indikasjon på hva som var i gjaere (Putin, 2021).…”