New NATO Arctic Posture Carries Major Implications for War in Ukraine

Over the last few weeks, there has been an uptick in international reporting on the various investments that are being made to improve the postures of the United States and its allies in the Arctic region. This includes widespread coverage of the recent acquisitions of Arctic Security Cutters by the United States and F-35 fighter jets by the Kingdom of Denmark.

Unfortunately, many commentators are narrowly interpreting these posture developments in the context of major power competition in the Arctic region. That is a mistake.

These posture improvements will not simply alter the balance of power in the Arctic. They will provide the Trump Administration with additional options for seizing the initiative in Ukraine and deterring Russian aggression in Eastern Europe.

To see how, it is useful to imagine the Arctic as a square on a chessboard. From that perspective, the Arctic is nothing more than an area for US and Allied forces to execute defensive moves. Consider these three examples.

The Arctic provides a potential theater for preventative moves. Within the US government, there have been a lot of civilian and defense intelligence resources expended on the forecasting moves by the Russian Armed Forces. That includes forecasting moves that involve the Russian Arctic posture (e.g., strategic bombers, Olenya Airbase). Those forecasts create a key opportunity for the Trump Administration to employ Arctic prophylaxis to seize the initiative.

The Arctic provides a potential theater for counterplay moves. In Washington, there are many policymakers who believe that Russian President Vladimir Putin has over-committed his military and security forces in Ukraine. That over-extension creates a strategic opportunity for the Trump Administration to employ Arctic counterplays that dissuade the execution of Russian threats in Ukraine.

The Arctic provides a potential theater for decoy and deflection moves. In Moscow, the top national security priorities include regime survival and homeland security. That hierarchy of threats creates a tactical opportunity for the Trump Administration to employ Arctic decoys and deflections to draw Russian forces to the Arctic and/or lure Russian forces away from Ukraine.

The problem is that the current Arctic posture is not well-designed for the US government to execute any of these strategic approaches and tactical motifs. Prophylaxis requires a proactive posture. Counterplay requires the capacity to create curve-balls and rapidly activate dormant pieces across the board. Decoy and deflection require high-value posture elements that are capable of motivating a desired response from an opponent when put into play.

That is why the Arctic posture improvements could have a significant impact on the future of the world order. The upgraded posture may enable the US government and NATO to more effectively and efficiently execute defensive moves such as prophylaxis, counterplay, decoy, and deception. If so, then it may open a new door for the Trump Administration to try to seize the initiative and start dictating the rhythm of the war in Ukraine.

Michael Walsh is a Senior Fellow at the Foreign Policy Research Institute. He formerly served on the Emerging Security Challenges Working Group at the Partnership for Peace Consortium.

Article previously published in the Kyiv Post