Northern Europe and the Arctic are always shaped by world order. This essay will discuss how US-China-Russia struggle over world order shapes our reality and how we can seek agency. China as one of the largest populations, states, economies, science and technology actors in the world is at the heart of the shaping of world order, and present in Northern Europe and the Arctic.
“There is nothing as practical as a good theory” (Kurt Lewin) and – I would add – world history to understand global developments. US victory in the Cold War and Soviet dissolution led to US unipolarity, which explains many things afterwards.
US unipolarity was the basis for Circumpolar (including Russia) Arctic cooperation in the Arctic Environmental Protection Strategy, the Arctic Council, Barents cooperation, etc. US unipolarity allowed for EU and NATO expansion. The US provided the global public goods in trade, finance, science and technology, etc., for globalization. Globalization and export-led growth contributed to China’s spectacular growth like other BRICS+ nations.
Under realist IR theory, the US would never tolerate a peer competitor as China. Under liberal theory, trade and economic growth would ensure peace, and/or lead to liberalization, even in China. Such expectations were named “The End of History” (Francis Fukuyama) or “Wandel durch Handel” but proved unfounded.
Northern Europe with open and competitive economies benefitted greatly from globalization, including business, science and technology ties to China. Denmark went the furthest with its 2008 Comprehensive Strategic Partnership with China. The Nordics and China also engaged in the Arctic. In 2013, China, India, Japan, South Korea and Singapore all became ordinary observers to the Arctic Council.
The 2012 Chinese state visit to Iceland led to the 2013 China-Nordic Arctic Research Centre network based at the Polar Research Institute of China, and to the 2014 China Iceland Arctic Observatory at Kárhóll in Northeast Iceland. China acceded the Svalbard Treaty in 1925, and China established the Yellow River Research Station in Ny Ålesund in 2004. These facilities are now scrutinized for dual-use or intelligence use. China sought investing in natural resources and infrastructure in the Nordic Arctic, which has been almost completely blocked. Chinese military interest in the Arctic is limited to the Pacific Arctic.
International politics today is driven by the triangle of US-China-Russia, with Europe sidelined. The US realized that globalization undermined its global predominance, the bedrock of American grand strategy since the early 1900s. President Obama “pivoted to Asia” and Presidents Trump and Biden followed with trade and technology wars to curtail Chinese development.
The Sino-US conflict curtails Sino-Northern European relations. The Arctic is now divided between the NATO Arctic and the Russian Arctic (with Chinese and BRICS+ engagement) by both Sino-US relations and Russia’s 2022 invasion of Ukraine.
US long-term grand strategy is clear: domination of the Western hemisphere (see Greenland) and denying any competing great power domination of Europe or East Asia. Therefore, US engaged in two world wars and the Cold War. Now, the US can pull back from Europe. What competing great power should threaten to dominate Europe, an aging, stagnant Germany, Russia stuck in Donbas? Europe and Russia will remain divided for decades.
To dominate East Asia, the US will never allow China to catch up. The US will do all to contain China’s economic, scientific, and technological development. The US will never accept the three most core interests of China: continued rule by the Communist Party, economic growth, and reunification with Taiwan. China can never accept that it should remain relatively underdeveloped. There is no grand bargain to be made between the US and China. The US will never abandon Taiwan, which is so convenient to contain China. Trump is a blip on long-term grand strategy. China will never allow Russia to be defeated in Ukraine creating a two-front situation for China facing the US, regardless of what Europe thinks.
What should be (Northern) Europe’s strategy towards China? Perhaps the first step is to realize that there is hardly anything Europe can do to influence the US European strategic calculation. Secondly, Europe has no influence over US strategy towards China, nor over Chinese core interests or strategy towards the US or Russia. Thirdly, ask if or how our interests compare with US or Chinese interests.
Northern Europe benefitted from globalization. How can we continue to benefit from Chinese growth, science, technology, innovation? How does strategic dual-use Chinese science and technology (aimed at the US and Taiwan) affect Europe? How can we ensure our competitiveness faced with the scale of Chinese manufacturing, science and technology? How can we benefit without excessive dependence on China? What security precautions are needed – for our own sake?
Rasmus Gjedssø Bertelsen, 贝牧思
PhD (Cantab), Professor
UiT The Arctic University of Norway
Tromsø, Norway
Photo Stina Guldbrandsen/UiT
