Ilan Berman
With the return of the Trump administration, the concept of great power competition has seen something of a renaissance. To its credit, the view of China as a predatory global player that emerged during President Donald Trump's first term in office was perpetuated by his successor, Joe Biden. Even so, recent months have seen strategic competition between the United States and China in everything from strategic minerals to trade expand to virtually every corner of the world.
But one place where real competition hasn't yet kicked off in earnest is the Arctic. It's certainly true that the Trump White House grasps the strategic importance of the region; during its first term in office, it reopened Arctic waters for drilling as part of a robust America First energy policy, and there's now a broad understanding among administration officials that the area is one of vital national interest. Still, it's fair to say that U.S. attention to the Arctic hasn't kept pace with that of the People's Republic of China (PRC).
Back in 2018, the government of Xi Jinping issued its official Arctic strategy. That document framed the PRC as a "Near-Arctic State" and outlined a broad vision for engagement and investment in the region. Since then, China has become a stakeholder in Russian Arctic projects like the Yamal LNG pipeline and a deep-water port in Arkhangelsk. It has made inroads among other Arctic states as well by establishing research facilities in Iceland and Norway's Svalbard peninsula.
Studies have estimated total Chinese investments in the Arctic to total in excess of $90 billion to date. To what end is a hotly debated topic. A recent study by Harvard University's Belfer Center has argued that those investments are decidedly more modest than advertised, and less significant than many assume. National security experts, though, warn that the PRC's inroads are the prelude for an expanded, multi-domain strategy designed to make the Arctic a real domain of competition. The stakes are massive because the region is strategically vital for a range of military, economic, and geopolitical reasons.
No comments:
Post a Comment