March 27th, 2009 | 
A recent article on Danger Room with regards to Russia’s plans to create a new Arctic military specifically to defend the country’s interests in the disputed polar region perked my attention for the potential of a US counter creation (pretty good ‘eh?). It’s been stated before, and I’ll say it again: a potential “cold-war” is gearing up in the waters of the North. Danger Room has a link to a published document on the Russian National Security Council’s website and since I don’t read Russian I can’t tell you what it really says. The information quoted from DR states that Russia looks to create this dedicated force
…to increase the effectiveness of cooperation with the border agencies (coast guards) of neighboring states in the fight against terrorism on the high seas, combat smuggling and illegal migration and defend marine life and resources.
Well that sounds a lot like the default “C” answer on a multiple choice test (not a lot of terrorism going on in the Arctic… yet), but it also sounds like a ploy to ensure there are no hard feelings when one of their vessels enter into another nations space- which is exactly what happened when Canada intercepted a few of Russians fighter jets.
So the question now is if Russia is building its forces to ensure patrolling of the arctic is taking place- where are the rest of the nations with Arctic interests? On the Northern route, that is, the route over the top of the world, there are five surrounding Arctic states: Russia, the United States (via Alaska), Canada, Norway and Denmark (via Greenland). We’ve discussed Russia but what about the rest? Well, as noted in this same piece is the love that Canada is giving the area via its plan to open two military bases in the Canadian area of the Arctic. Well that’s two of five- next is Norway which has about half of its nation of land pointing at the Norwegian Sea of which their Royal Norwegian Navy does their bidding in protecting their rights. Greenland sits as a huge piece of ice (I know, not really) that you can’t miss if you’re transiting the passage. As such they maintain a substantial amount of territory along the waters of the Arctic as well- of which is watched over by their Mother Nation of Denmark. That leaves the United States.
The U.S., by way of the Coast Guard and National Science Foundation (NSF), has also been looking into the need for a full time US asset up off the waters of Northern Alaska. With the continual and recent discussion of the U.S.’s potentially needed enroll us into in the U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) it’s looking more and more favorable for the US to pursue a continual force in said waters to protect U.S. interests of minerals, oil, and overall U.S.-ness. The Coast Guard as it seems will be, and has been, the lead agency to undertake the review of such needs and the NSF has been working to see how far out our claimable land actually goes (check out the updated Google Earth for a good picture). The Danger Room article has a quote of ADM Allen, the USCG Commandant, from a Jane’s Defense Weekly piece, as saying “I have to be prepared to respond and put assets there to accomplish [Coast Guard] missions.”
Where do we go from here? One thought is to employ the U.S. Navy assets to the area but for me to say that I would be saying the Coast Guard can’t… right? Well not really. The Navy may have assets (I’m not a Navy guy) that may be able to already operate in the area as a defense force, or maybe they would be a more suitable platform, as a service, to have their vessel altered to to so. Now this, as a member of the Coast Guard, is not an easy thing to say. But on my drive home from work, as I pass the Portsmouth Naval Shipyards, I see these massive vessels just sitting there that may be able to do the job. However, this is not the future of our Navy- this is the future of my, er, our, Coast Guard. But how do we as the United States Coast Guard compete with a county such as Russia in showing our military prowess in the Arctic Region? Collaboration.
To work both close and far from the coast lines this may require both the area knowledge of the Coast Guard and the military might of the U.S. Navy. I guess we could go out and include the Marines, Army, and Air Force for good measure, but I don’t know what they could do… yet. Our biggest hurdle as a nation is have suitable assets (vessels, air craft) to operate in the arena. Next will be a year-round functional base, but it’s not like Barrow, Alaska is short of land are they? I guess I could spend a lot more time on my plan, but that’s not how it’s going to work. So anyone else have a though on how we, the U.S. or the USCG, can match that of the other four Arctic nations in defending our homeland and mineral rights? Or at the very least match that of what Russia is proposing?
Also see this link for all of our past posts on the Arctic region.
Related posts:
