The Arctic This Week Take Five: Week of 8 April, 2024

Russia’s Zvezda Shipyard Completes Arc7 Fleet for Novatek’s Arctic LNG 2 

High North News announced on April 8 that Russia’s Zvezda Shipyard has launched two additional Arc7 LNG carriers, completing the launch of all five vessels currently under construction to support Novatek’s Arctic LNG 2 project. The ships were launched despite the end of shipbuilding contracts with South Korea’s Samsung Heavy Industries (SHI) and France’s Gaztransport & Technigaz (GTT), but the exact status of construction remains unclear. (High North News)

Take 1: While the completion of these vessels constitutes a relatively small step forward in Novatek’s ambitions to start exporting LNG from its Arctic LNG 2 plant, there is still a long way to go before the vessels can become operational. Initially, Novatek envisioned starting exports in the first quarter of 2024, but comprehensive sanctions, a loss of foreign shareholders, and an ensuing shortage of gas tankers have caused severe delays. In early April, Novatek even suspended production at the Arctic LNG 2 site until at least June 2024. Moreover, the company announced last week that the project would downscale, omitting one of the three development trains. So far, nothing related to Arctic LNG 2 has gone according to plan, which can be largely attributed to the united Western front against Russia’s war in Ukraine. Russia’s confidence in overcoming sanctions by substituting Western partners with other firms and its own technology is being increasingly undermined, showing the effectiveness of the Western sanctions regime and the importance of maintaining them. The sanctions not only isolate Russia from crucial technological and financial resources but also erode confidence among potential international partners that are wary of entanglement in geopolitical tensions. For instance, the partnership with South Korean shipbuilder SHI – which initially built the five vessels – has terminated. The immediate outlook for Arctic LNG 2 remains uncertain, potentially prompting a far-reaching re-evaluation of Russia’s energy strategy in the Arctic, such as increasing self-reliance, downscaling, or expanding outreach to non-Western partners. (High North News, Reuters, The Barents Observer)

Norway Remains Committed to Future Engagement with Russia and Maintains Visa-Free Zone

As reported by the Barents Observer on April 9, Norway will continue its visa-free travel agreement with Russia for a 30-kilometer zone in Pechenga, along Norway’s northern border, despite the war in Ukraine and the presence of two heavily involved military brigades in the area. In the announcement, State Secretary Eivind Vad Petersson emphasized Norway’s aim to foster future positive relations and cross-border cooperation. The visa-free policy, effective from 2013, allows visa-free travel for residents within 30 kilometers of the border. However, Russian cross-border traffic has ceased due to the closure of Norway’s consulate generalin Murmansk, which process permits. (The Barents Observer)

Take 2: Norway’s decision to maintain the visa-free zone with Russia is not suprising and is consistent with the country’s long-standing policy of aligning with Western sanctions but keeping the door ajar for potential constructive engagement with Russia. Norway’s long-term Arctic interests are characterized by stability, cooperation, and peaceful coexistence, with an emphasis on long-term stability over short-term gains. Thus, the country has no interest in increasing tensions in the Arctic region, not least with its neighbor, who is also the largest Arctic state. They have applied the same philosophy to their chairmanship of the Arctic Council, which is anchored in “promot[ing] stability and constructive cooperation in the Arctic“. So far, Norway has managed to slowly resume the Council’s work in the working groups through a set of consensus-based guidelines. Norway’s position vis-à-vis Russia has always been very cautious as it tries to prevent bilateral tensions from heightening in the north. In February 2024, Norway also reiterated its hope for renewed cooperation when Russia would return as a “reliable partner” in the international community. While Norway’s cautiousness has been critiqued, their impact on the resumption of some level of Arctic cooperation is undeniable. Challenges in the Arctic will not develop in isolation along country borders, so addressing shared issues will be inevitable. Norway’s approach acknowledges the intricate balance between national security interests and the collective good, which can prove important in maintaining the Arctic as a zone free of armed conflict. (Arctic Council, High North News, High North News)

Canada Unveils Ambitious Arctic Defense Spending to Increase Military Profile 

CBC News shared on April 9 that the Canadian federal government announced a major Arctic defense spending plan, totaling CA$8.1 billion over the next five years, extending to CA$73 billion over twenty years. The “Our North, Strong and Free” policy aims includes investments in new fighter jets, maritime patrol aircraft, Arctic and offshore patrol vessels, and specialized maritime sensors for ocean surveillance. Additionally, CA$218 million will be allocated to establish “northern operational support hubs”, enabling a year-round presence in the Arctic with logistics facilities, equipment, and stockpiles essential for military operations, as well as investments in multi-use infrastructure. (CBC News)

Take 3: Canada’s pledge to anchor its military presence in the Arctic is not only symptomatic of a broader international trend of increased geopolitical interest and military investment in the region, but also reflects the security concerns in the country’s northern territories in light of the war in Ukraine. Although there is no immediate threat to the Canadian North, attention on the region has grown due to the rapidly melting ice paired with geopolitical shifts in the region, such as by the increased interest of new, non-Arctic states. While Canada should protect its sovereignty in the Arctic, a year-long Arctic military presence can alter existing security dynamics and lead to further militarization. In addition, Canada should be mindful of other, non-military security challenges in the region that mainly affect the Indigenous communities, such as food, economic, and environmental insecurities. An increased military presence in the Arctic could also affect the sovereignty of Indigenous communities. Historically, Canada’s expansion of its Northern military presence has often involved forced relocations of local Inuit residents and negatively impacted Indigenous ways of life. The push for military infrastructure and operations in the Arctic, such as during the construction of the Distant Early Warning Line, led to ecological damage and social disruptions that still resonate today. These lessons from the past underscore that Canada should consider the full spectrum of security, including human security and environmental integrity, in its Arctic policymaking. (Canadian Dimension, CBC News, Legion Magazine, The New York Times)

The Planned Closure of the N.W.T. Mines Entails Profound Socio-Economic Impacts

Eye on the Arctic announced on April 9 that Yellowknife’s mayor and council were presented with a report warning of significant economic impacts due to the upcoming closures of major mines in the Northwest Territories. The report, prepared by territorial economist Graeme Clinton’s firm Impact Economics, predicts a loss of over 1,500 jobs and about 1,100 residents, with a reduction of approximately CA$100 million in consumer spending. The closure of several major diamond mines are anticipated to not only affect Yellowknife but also have territory-wide economic repercussions. (CBC News)

Take 4: While important for environmental protection, the imminent closure of major diamond mines in Canada’s Northwest Territories will have major social and economic repercussions for the Indigenous population. These mines, vital for local and regional economies, are a source of employment and business activity within a context where alternative employment opportunities are often scarce. The reported loss of jobs, departure of residents and reduction of consumer spending will contract the local economy, which could exacerbate already present challenges, such as high living costs and limited access to services. Many Indigenous communities have historically negotiated agreements with mining companies – called Impact and Benefit Agreements in Canada – for employment, training, and financial compensation, which are crucial for economic sustainability and community development. The closure of mines threatens these benefits, potentially widening the socio-economic gaps and undermining efforts towards self-determination and economic independence. Environmental remediation can be another source of concern. There have been many instances of poorly remediated or even abandoned mines in Canada’s North. The Arctic region is highly vulnerable to pollution and improper mine closures can not only lead to severe socio-economic repercussions but also cause long-lasting ecological impacts. As such, it is important that companies engage with the impacted communities from the start. Overall, the decision to close the mines presents an opportunity for the government to create guidelines and clear regulations on both environmental and social considerations to limit potential negative externalities. (Cision, CBC News, The Northern Review)

Climate Change Spurs Species Hybridization in the Arctic

As climate change continues, hybrid animals like the polar bear-grizzly bear mix, known as “pizzly” or “grolar” bears, are increasingly being observed in the Arctic, as reported by CNN on April 6. While hybrid species are not unheard of, researchers emphasize that this trend may escalate as polar bears spend more time on land and encounter other species, potentially leading to more hybridization. (CNN)

Take 5: Hybridization is not a new phenomenon in the natural world. In fact, “pizzlies” have been around the Arctic for millennia, according to bear biologist Andrew Derocher. Nevertheless, the earliest official discovery was in 2006, when a wild polar-grizzly bear was spotted in Canada’s Northwest Territories. However, in recent years, their numbers have risen, and climate change is likely a contributing factor. When the Arctic sea ice melts, polar bears are forced to go further south. In contrast, the land-based grizzly bears are now moving northwards, increasing the potential for contact between the two species and the chances of mating. The rapid environmental changes outpace the evolutionary adjustments of many species, which can result in the disruption of established ecosystems and reduce biodiversity. The Arctic, which warms four times faster than the global average, serves as a canary in the coal mine for these ecological shifts, highlighting the possibility for ever-increasing encounters between species that used to be isolated from one another. Critically, while hybridization may offer some species a temporary adaptive advantage, it raises concerns about the long-term viability of species, genetic diversity, and the resilience of ecosystems. For instance, the sterility of hybrid fish in Vermont points to a potential dead end in the evolutionary pathway, highlighting a serious concern about the sustainability of such adaptations. The shift towards hybridization and the consequent loss of genetically distinct species could also undermine the ecological balance, affecting key relationships, such as predator-prey dynamics and competition. (CBC News, CNN, Live Science)