A Split Arctic Narrative

The Arctic has experienced several changes in recent years which has transformed the Arctic into a geopolitical hotspot. This is mainly due to environmental changes, which have changed the landscape and made resources more accessible. This combined with a geological survey that announced that the Arctic contains 13 percent of the world’s conventional oil reserves has dramatically increased the interest in the Arctic. Some of the actors that have increased their activities in the Arctic are Russia, the U.S., and the EU. There are other countries as well, but these are currently the most impactful and interesting players out of a geopolitical view. Among these actors, Russia and the U.S. have steadily increased their military presence in the Arctic which has drastically altered the Artic security, which has been contrasted as a “New Cold War” in media and academics. This view, however, is split between two major parties. One stating that the Arctic is showing clear build-up towards a conflict and the other being that there is a very low risk of conflict, and that people are exaggerating the tension in the Arctic. This sparks the debate regarding the different attention the Arctic has been receiving from political, military, media, and academics alike. Either the Arctic is seen as the start of a new upcoming conflict, or simply as an overaction from the U.S. and Russia. To better explain this difference between perceptions of the Arctic, I use the Balance of Threat Theory to compare the views of the three actors to analyze their estimation of danger