Do Russian and American interests converge, with both sides working together to control Arctic energy shipping routes?

This is the nuclear-powered icebreaker “Lenin” photographed in Murmansk, Russia.        Xinhua News Agency

On March 9, NATO’s large-scale military exercise “Cold Response 2026” officially launched in Norway and Finland. The exercise will last until March 19, involving approximately 25,000 troops from 14 NATO member countries. It is a multi-domain joint operation covering land, sea, air, cyber, and space, aimed at strengthening NATO’s military presence and combat capabilities in the Arctic region. On the first day of the exercise, the Northern Fleet of Russia set up a missile firing range crossing the Russian-Norwegian border in the Barents Sea to precisely counter the exercise.

Analysts believe that the United States has always regarded the Arctic as a strategic stronghold. The Hormuz Strait navigation crisis has heightened U.S. focus on controlling international logistics routes. Against this backdrop, the strategic value of Arctic routes has become increasingly prominent.

Since 2022, Russia has vigorously developed the Northern Sea Route, a major transportation artery in the Arctic that shortens logistics routes between Europe and Asia. Some argue that the U.S. is attempting to turn this route from Russian-controlled to an international corridor, essentially aiming to reshape its influence in the Arctic. In the future, the competition between the U.S. and Russia over key Arctic waterways will intensify.

NATO Seeks Arctic Dominance

“Cold Response” is a routine NATO military exercise, initiated in 2006 and usually hosted by Norway every two years. “Cold Response 2026” is part of NATO’s “Arctic Sentinel” multi-domain military operations launched in February this year. The main goal of “Arctic Sentinel” is to consolidate NATO’s position in the Arctic and “High North” regions, covering trade, transportation, and other fields. Essentially, it is a significant move by NATO to expand influence and compete for regional dominance in the Arctic.

What are the highlights of this military exercise? Xu Guangmiao, Associate Professor at the School of Politics and International Relations, East China Normal University, and an Arctic issues expert, told this reporter that the main points focus on three aspects: First, the exercise area has extended to Finland for the first time. A key part of the exercise is ensuring the safe passage of multinational forces through multiple border crossings into Finland and completing deployment under winter conditions; second, new civilian-related drills have been added, with Norway designating 2026 as a “Year of Comprehensive Defense” to enhance the emergency response capabilities of civilians, businesses, and public institutions in war and disaster scenarios; third, the U.S. claims to have canceled some F-35 deployment plans due to global troop deployment issues, reflecting that European NATO allies are taking on more responsibilities in Arctic defense.

Russia Strongly Opposes Militarization of the Arctic

Russia has long opposed the militarization of the Arctic. Moscow has repeatedly stated that NATO’s military activities in the region are disruptive and severely damage prospects for cooperation among Arctic nations. Russia possesses sufficient strength to respond adequately to unfriendly actions from the West.

In addition to reserving the right to counter, since 2022, developing the Northern Sea Route has become a strategic priority for Russia. The Russian government aims to achieve year-round navigation along this route by building icebreaker fleets and coastal infrastructure.

Mu Xin, Director of the Russian Political Information Center, said that the Hormuz Strait navigation crisis highlights the importance of international shipping lanes. “The U.S. not only needs to control resource origins but also the global flow of resources.”

According to Xu Guangmiao, after the Hormuz Strait crisis, the U.S. and Russia have shown subtle differences in their understanding of route security: the U.S. demonstrates a strong desire to control global energy transportation chokepoints, while Russia emphasizes its role as a “dual alternative supplier” for energy and shipping security. Consequently, the strategic significance of Arctic routes has further increased, as they are not only commercial shortcuts bypassing traditional high-risk nodes but may also become increasingly important variables in the global energy supply landscape.

Arctic Holds Dual Significance for the U.S. and Russia

A think tank, the Quincy Institute, has stated that the Arctic holds dual significance for the U.S. and Russia: it is both a frontier for breaking ice and a battlefield for strategic competition. The article notes that the choice of Alaska for last year’s U.S.-Russia summit indicates that the Arctic has been established as a key region for advancing U.S.-Russia normalization. Russian President Putin said at a joint press conference with U.S. President Trump, “Cooperation in the Arctic and restoring regional relations, including links between Russia’s Far East and the U.S. West Coast, are very important.”

Russian Presidential Aide Ushakov said that the Arctic is where Russian and American interests intersect and could give rise to large-scale mutually beneficial projects. Specific cooperation might include energy extraction, natural resource development, and icebreaker construction. Currently, Russia is the only country with a nuclear-powered icebreaker fleet, possessing eight active nuclear icebreakers and 34 diesel-powered ones, while the U.S. has only three icebreakers in service. Expanding the icebreaker fleet is crucial for the U.S.

The Arctic is also a strategic battleground for the U.S. and Russia. This is evident from NATO’s increasingly frequent military activities in the region. There is a risk of a renewed arms race and deployment of more advanced weapon systems, including hypersonic missiles. The Trump administration placed great strategic importance on Arctic security, as reflected in its comments on acquiring Greenland and its mention of the Arctic 14 times in the 2025 “Annual Threat Assessment of the U.S. Intelligence Community.”

Xu Guangmiao believes that Russia’s proposal for a $12 trillion economic cooperation plan during the U.S.-Russia-Ukraine trilateral talks involves Arctic cooperation. Putin also proposed a cross-Bering Strait tunnel project with Trump, indicating that future Arctic shipping competition may involve rule-making, economic interests, and military presence in a complex, parallel manner.

Nordic Countries’ Complex Attitudes

It is noteworthy that this exercise is led by Norway, not the U.S. In the context of the “purchase of islands” incident, the military exercise also reflects tensions and estrangement in transatlantic relations. In fact, in February, Norwegian Prime Minister Støre delivered a keynote speech at the Arctic Frontiers forum, clearly outlining Norway’s current Arctic strategy: supporting Denmark’s sovereignty over Greenland while emphasizing collective security within the transatlantic alliance and committing to more autonomous responsibilities to achieve Europe’s defense, economic security, and overall resilience in the Arctic.

Xu Guangmiao believes this attitude largely represents the overall perception of Nordic countries, including Denmark. Europe has a unified voice on Greenland but also harbors extremely complex sentiments. They hope to maintain a “fight but not break” stance with the Trump administration, trying to sustain transatlantic alliance security cooperation while also expecting policy changes after the U.S. midterm elections.