Camilla Tenna Nørup Sørensen

While Europe has its focus on the war in Ukraine and an aggressive Russia, the structural trends will continue to increase the geoeconomic and geopolitical importance of Asia in the evolving international order. The US-China great power competition is playing out most intensely in Asia, where the regional states in response are increasing their security cooperation and strengthening their military capacity. Consequently, a multifaceted regional security complex spanning a wide range of economic, technological, political, security and military areas is developing. Europe confronts growing incentives – and growing US expectations – to increase its economic and political engagement as well as its security and defense policy contributions to the region, and this in particular goes for close US allies in Europe like Denmark.

En krig i Europa involverende et uforudsigeligt og aggressivt Rusland er selvsagt øverst på dagsordenen i europæiske hovedstæder. Ruslands invasion af Ukraine ændrer imidlertid ikke på, at verdens økonomiske, politiske og sikkerhedspolitiske tyngdepunkt vil fortsætte med at rykke mod øst. Rapporten indledes med en præsentation af Indo-Pacific som den centrale region i international økonomi, politik og sikkerhedspolitik de kommende årtier. Herefter følger et afsnit om regionens økonomi og institutioner efterfulgt af afsnit om regionens militær og militærgeografi. I disse afsnit præsenteres og diskuteres udviklinger i de regionale landes økonomiske og militære kapabiliteter med fokus på, hvordan det tegner sig fremadrettet. I det efterfølgende afsnit rettes fokus mod de vigtigste stater og brændpunkter med vægt på udfordringer og muligheder for Europa, Danmark og dansk Forsvar. Det leder frem til rapportens konklusion, der samler op og giver et samlet bud på implikationer for Europa, Danmark og dansk Forsvar samt policy inputs.

Rapporten er udarbejdet på foranledning af analysegruppen ledet af Amb. Michael Zilmer-Johns, som regeringen nedsatte i december 2019 som led i forberedelsen af det næste forsvarsforlig fra 2024.

The eight recognized Arctic states—Canada, Denmark (via Greenland), Finland, Iceland, Norway, Russia, Sweden, and the United States—have long cooperated in the Arctic region, even when their respective interests, especially those between Russia and the United States, have clashed on other matters. They have done so because each state perceives that it benefits from the current state of cooperation, which occurs through a set of international, regional, and subregional governance mechanisms. But conditions in the Arctic are evolving—driven by such factors as climate change, economics, and geopolitics—and thus its governance mechanisms must also evolve in order to mitigate new risks before they potentially escalate into conflict. What are these risks? How should existing governance mechanisms evolve to mitigate those risks? In this report, researchers propose and implement an adaptive, four-stage approach to identify potential Arctic conflict catalysts; determine, confirm, and prioritize the catalysts that cannot be solved through existing Arctic governance mechanisms; and identify potential governance mechanisms that can evolve to mitigate identified risks. The researchers conclude that, to decrease the risk of unraveling cooperation by 2030, Arctic stakeholders should work toward resolving gaps in Arctic governance in three ways: improving currently limited dialogue and transparency on military issues, updating and providing new capabilities to implement existing governance agreements, and enabling more inclusivity in Arctic-relevant decisionmaking without challenging the sovereignty of Arctic states.

Rapporten viser, at den nuværende sikkerhedspolitiske udvikling i Arktis, der er præget af stormagtsrivalisering mellem Rusland, Kina og USA, sætter Kongeriget i en svær situation. Som en lille stat har Kongeriget draget fordel af perioden med sikkerhedspolitisk lavspænding i Arktis. Denne er nu under pres. Det er i Kongerigets interesse at forsøge at værne om de arktiske fora og samarbejdsrelationer, der har gjort lavspændingen muligt. Kongeriget må imidlertid også forholde sig til de nye sikkerhedspolitiske dynamikker i Arktis. Dette skaber behov for ændrede tilgange både i forhold til stormagterne og deres interesser i Arktis og i forhold til samarbejdet i Rigsfællesskabet.

U.S.-China strategic rivalry is intensifying – and nowhere more so than in the Indo-Pacific. This is likely to result in new US requests to close allies like Denmark to increase their security and defense policy contributions to the region. French and British efforts to establish an independent European presence in the Indo-Pacific present Denmark with a way to accommodate US requests without being drawn directly into the US confrontation with China.

The Arctic region is identified in Chinese strategic considerations and plans as the “new strategic frontier”, where the great powers will compete in the coming years. This links up with the “Made in China 2025” strategy, which identifies key sectors or industries, such as AI, 5G, maritime and space technology, in which China wants to take the lead and set global standards, writes Camilla T. N. Sørensen, Associate Professor at the Institute for Strategy at the Royal Danish Defence College in Copenhagen.

Great power politics in the Arctic are intensifying. The US, Russia and China are all strengthening their presence in the region. With the Arctic strategy of the Kingdom of Denmark presently in the process of being updated, this report analyses the assessments and strategies of Finland, Norway and Iceland and identifies points for consideration by the Kingdom of Denmark. These include emphasizing the value of closely coordinating with the other Nordic countries to establish Arctic-specific military confidence-building measures (CBMs); prioritizing the development of sufficient national capability to decrease reliance on immediate US and NATO involvement; taking a proactive approach to securing influence over the evolving military presence and activities of the US and NATO on the Kingdom of Denmark’s territory; further exploring the idea of alternative funding options for Arctic development; and strengthening of Nordic collaboration on intelligence activities, information exchange and diplomatic efforts concerning all three great powers.