Trump’s Arctic strategy: A new path to ending the Russia-Ukraine war? Article by Responsible Statecraft

The American think tank Responsible Statecraft has published an article about the possibility of US President-elect Donald Trump using cooperation in the Arctic to resolve the Ukrainian conflict. Caliber.Az presents a slightly modified version of the piece.  

Since Donald Trump’s reelection, his promise to quickly end the Russia-Ukraine War has become increasingly distant, as the situation in Ukraine worsens. Current strategies of sending more arms and imposing sanctions on Russia seem unlikely to bring peace, with Russia continuing its steady advance. President Vladimir Putin may have decided to pursue a more complete military victory, ignoring near-term Western peace overtures.

However, the incoming U.S. administration has an opportunity to break from the status quo and offer Russia incentives to end the war, particularly focusing on the Arctic, an issue that holds significant importance for Putin. This aligns with Trump’s business-oriented approach to foreign policy, which seeks big deals.

Putin’s recent participation in the launch of the nuclear icebreaker Chukotka underscores his focus on the Arctic, an area critical to Russia’s future. The Chukotka, the largest and most powerful icebreaker globally, is part of a series aimed at developing the Northern Sea Route (NSR), a shipping lane that connects Western Europe to the Asia-Pacific region. This route has significant economic potential, especially for Russian energy exports. The Arctic region accounts for about 10% of Russia’s GDP, and Russia plans to dramatically increase resource exports through the NSR in the coming years.

For Putin, the Arctic is not only about energy but also about unlocking the vast economic potential of Siberia. Russia’s major rivers flow north, and a functional NSR could enable year-round navigation, facilitating development in the country’s resource-rich interior.

China is also invested in the NSR, through its “Polar Silk Road” initiative, and has sought closer ties with Russia. However, both Chinese and Russian analysts agree that the Arctic corridor will never reach its full potential without Western cooperation. This makes the Arctic a key area where the U.S. and other nations can influence the resolution of the Ukraine conflict.

A potential peace deal could involve directing a portion of the profits from the NSR (e.g., 5% for the next five decades) towards rebuilding Ukraine’s infrastructure. This could serve as reparations and potentially amount to hundreds of billions of dollars. Other countries, such as Canada, Finland, and South Korea, could benefit economically, while Western countries involved would likely implement stronger environmental standards.

For this plan to succeed, the U.S. would need to lift sanctions on NSR projects and encourage Western investment in the route. European shipping companies like Hapag Lloyd and Maersk could play a key role, as could incentives for Western investment along the NSR.

Trump’s first administration saw bold gestures in foreign policy, and his willingness to take risks for peace could be key in negotiating a deal that includes significant Arctic development. By offering Putin a long-term business deal tied to the Arctic, the U.S. could facilitate peace in Ukraine and provide a revitalized vision for Europe’s economic future.