The growth of Russian influence in the Arctic. Will it get hot in the ice?
America is preparing to throw another challenge
American National Security Advisor to the President John Bolton is ready to challenge the growing Russian military influence in the Arctic. He stated this when speaking to graduates of the Coast Guard Academy. Perhaps this can be attributed to the usual figures of speech, which are used on each suitable occasion, and forget, but still you first need to pay attention to the wording itself.
In the definition of “growing Russian military influence”, the key word is “military”. That is, the United States is precisely what is defined as the main threat to its interests. They are not embarrassed by the economic projects of Russia in the Arctic or scientific, no, most of all they are alarmed by the strengthening of the military component of the Russian presence in the region.
It follows that the words “challenge” carry a very serious load, because only by military means this growing military influence of Russia can be resisted. You will agree that Russia is unlikely to consider the construction of a research complex or a drifting station in response to the creation of the Russian military Arctic base "Shamrock"? So, consciously or unconsciously, Mr. Bolton makes it clear to us: in response to Russia's gain, the Americans are preparing to intensify even more so that they can have a year-round presence in the Arctic region.
Actually, considering where this statement was made, and also taking into account the accompanying rhetoric, this was by no means binomial Newton. Still, the clarification is important, because Americans love to talk about international cooperation, and about world peace, and other such things ...
J. Bolton:
If we note that previously US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo stated that the Arctic Council "became more attentive to the threat from China and Russia," the approximate train of thought in the heads of US high-ranking officials becomes clear. But for the time being it is not clear to everyone and to the end what exactly our “partners” are so annoying? Are they seriously afraid of Russian troops on the northern coast of Canada, or tremble for Alaska?
In fact, this is not entirely true. For more than a hundred years, America has been living by the formula "Who owns the sea, he owns the world." It is attributed to the American Rear Admiral, a prominent theorist of naval affairs, one of the first major geopolitics Alfred Mahan. This phrase very briefly and clearly reflects the essence of the concept of Mahan, according to which the control of maritime trade is, in fact, a key factor in determining the fate of the world. The one who controls it has the right to dispose of those to whom to develop and to whom to live, to strangle with the sea blockade, and to whom to ensure the uninterrupted provision of the necessary resources, raw materials, technologies and so on.
Probably right now we see how this doctrine has manifested itself in all its glory. So, you can only admire the man who formulated all this almost a half century ago.
From cabotage to international traffic
The Northern Sea Route, as we know, is now rather an internal transport corridor providing supplies to remote northern regions of the country, export of hydrocarbons, metals (the largest producer of which, Norilsk Nickel, depends almost entirely on the Northern Sea Route), and more. .d But some warming of the climate and “thawing” of the Arctic promise him (and us, as a state) much greater prospects. In particular, in the foreseeable future, the Northern Sea Route may become a full-fledged alternative to the sea route from Asia to Europe (and vice versa) - around India, through the Suez Canal, etc.
According to experts, the total freight turnover in this direction may soon reach eight hundred million tons. And in monetary terms, he has already reached 700 billions of dollars. Despite the fact that China and some other interested countries are trying to somehow diversify their logistics in this area, as long as it works out badly. This means that the lion’s share of trade between the EU and the countries of the Asia-Pacific region runs along the said sea route, which is almost entirely controlled by the United States and its allies.
Any serious alternative to this trade route drastically reduces the chances of the United States at the right time to completely “block oxygen”, for example, to China. This means that the United States cannot allow such an alternative to emerge. Or, if this cannot be prevented, it must be taken over its control and begin to dispose of it as well, for example, in the Indian Ocean or in the Philippine archipelago.
It is clear that skeptics will say: the creation of such an alternative is very expensive, which means that its appearance is unlikely. Moreover, the previously established path is fairly safe, studied, and comfortable - why should the garden be planted for the sake of perhaps a gain of a few days?
And where is the money to take?
But the answer is quite simple. First of all, you need to keep in mind that the main interested party is China. The country is very powerful, it is very interested in security of its trade routes, it has enough resources and means. Europe, perhaps, would be ready to continue to follow in the tail of its American friends, but this hardly concerns the economic benefits and commercial interests of European companies.
And in this sense, everything is also quite good - in some cases, the temporary gain of the shipper and the transport company can be up to ten days if they send the goods along the Northern Sea Route. That is nearly thirty percent. Is it a lot or a little?
Strictly speaking, for any electronics manufacturer this is not critical at all - the load will not deteriorate, it will not have time to become obsolete. But for the transport company, the shipowner is a huge gain. Just imagine that your ship takes on a new cargo at least a quarter more often. This is not so critical when it comes to a one-time contract. But when we talk about years or even decades of work of a transport vessel, the benefit becomes simply enormous, and it is unlikely that any shipowner will refuse to increase his income so much.
Of course, everything is not so simple: pilotage in arctic waters is still very expensive. But nuclear-powered icebreakers are relatively inexpensive to operate (we’ll clarify with large amounts of work), and the cost of transportation along the southern route is also greatly influenced by the payment for passing through the Suez Canal, various pilotage and dispatch deductions in narrow places such as straits, and the dormant crew ten days to pay.
And if we consider that a significant part of the transport companies engaged in cargo transportation along the Europe-Asia route and back, is somehow controlled by the Europeans, the issue becomes far from idle.
Therefore, we can well expect that the transformation of the Northern Sea Route into a powerful international transport artery will proceed at a much faster pace than skeptics say ...
And if so, the interest of Americans to this topic becomes quite understandable. No, there is not even a desire to podgadit Russia - here is something much more important and important, here, without exaggeration, it is about the possibility to continue to rule the world.
But now the Americans have only two icebreakers of not the first freshness, but John Bolton, reasoning about the need to challenge Russia. And with all due respect to the American capabilities, we must admit that this will somehow not be enough to block, if necessary, this new transport artery. And taking into account the Russian (and Chinese) forces, which can be operatively concentrated at the Bering Strait, even a full-fledged American AUG looks doubtful ...
Therefore, we are waiting for the "partners" to get to the words from the matter, and closely monitor their hands. That and look, in the Arctic it will really become hot ...
Information