The Arctic This Week Take Five: Week of 11 May, 2026
Greenpeace Embarks on Expedition to Map Arctic Deep-Sea Life
High North News reported on May 13 that Greenpeace launched an expedition to map Arctic deep sea ecosystems. Researchers Paco Cárdenas (Uppsala University) and Anne Helene Tandberg (University Museum of Bergen) are leading the expedition aboard the research vessel Celtic Explorer. Accompanied by an international team of six marine biologists, the researchers set sail from Ireland and are headed towards an area between Iceland, Svalbard, and Jan Mayen. By using underwater robots, they will livestream the ecosystems of the Arctic deep sea. The expedition is set to conclude on June 5th in Bergen. (High North News)
Take 1: Little is known about the Arctic deep sea, yet political and commercial interest in its economic exploitation is growing. This Greenpeace-led mission is heading towards an area that was initially opened for mineral activities by Norway in 2024, though licensing plans have since been halted following backlash. Still, the broader question of future extraction remains unresolved. This is important since the deep sea is far from an empty or lifeless space. Although scientists disagree on a precise definition, the notion of deep sea (or deep ocean) generally refers to the cold and dark waters below 200m, where the sunlight no longer reaches. It takes up about 95% of the earth’s living space and sustains a complex ecosystem: researchers estimate that about 10 million species live there, many of which are undiscovered – similar to a tropical rainforest. Arctic glacial fjords in particular are beaming with marine life, but remain understudied. As sea ice recedes, scientists are increasingly able to probe the untouched Arctic seafloor and assess how life adapted to extreme environments and how climate change is affecting it. Meanwhile, melting ice also signals economic access to decision-makers. Yet the repercussions of deep sea mining in the Arctic are unclear. The High North ecosystem responds differently to economic activities than elsewhere in the world: the extreme cold slows down biological recovery to a near standstill. It is therefore crucial to better understand and protect these fragile environments. (Deep Sea Conservation, Oceanographic, PLoS One Journal)
Increased Defense Spending in the High North Neglects Needs of Locals
Eye on the Arctic reported on May 12 that Leah Gazan, a Member of Parliament for Canada’s New Democratic Party (NDP) criticized the federal government over its budget allocations for the country’s northern territories. She argued that spending increases are focused solely on defense and related infrastructure projects while issues like housing problems and food insecurity remain underaddressed. (Eye on the Arctic)
Take 2: In recent months, the governments of many – if not all – Arctic states have announced increased spending for their High North territories. Canada allocated CA$35 billion in increased spending to enhance the security of its Arctic region. However, this spending is predominantly geared towards the development of assets useful for military operations, such as air strips, roads, and upgrades to military bases. While some of these investments are useful for civilians as well, there continues to be a severe lack of funding for the basic needs of Canada’s northern residents, such as in Nunavut, which struggles with the highest rates of food insecurity in Canada. Moreover, Canada’s northern regions continue to grapple with a severe housing crisis, lack of access to quality education and jobs, and disproportionately high rates of mental health issues compared to the rest of Canada. MP Gazan therefore rightly argues that defense spending seems to take precedence over the basic human rights of northern citizens. While there are some programs in place, like the Inuit Child First Initiative, Nutrition North, and the Northern Isolated Community Initiatives Fund,these remain structurally underfunded and are unable to address the root causes of these issues. In times of growing militarization, it is indeed important to safeguard and strengthen the security and sovereignty of the nation, but – as a western welfare state – it remains equally crucial to address preventable social issues and ensure that the residents living in these regions have sufficient access to basic necessities. (CSA Group, Eye on the Arctic, Policy Options)
Greenland and US Discuss American Military Presence
As shared by Eye on the Arctic on May 13, Greenland’s Prime Minister Jens-Frederik Nielsen stated that an increase of American military presence is on the table during the island’s ongoing negotiations with the US. During the talks, US officials allegedly signaled their intent of opening three additional bases in southern Greenland and designating them as sovereign territory of the US. Narsarsuaq in the south and Kangerlussuaq in the southwest have been flagged as potential locations. Both are former US bases with existing infrastructure. The third location has not yet been identified. (Eye on the Arctic)
Take 3: In 1945, the US had seventeen military facilities in Greenland. By 1951, it reached an agreement with Denmark to secure access to additional defense areas, like the Pituffik Space Base. All necessary legal grounds to expand a US military presence are thus already in place and Greenland has signaled its willingness to engage on matters related to military and business cooperation. However, Greenland’s sovereignty is non-negotiable and turning US military bases into sovereign enclaves is in clear violation of this. Although the Trump administration continues to show its disregard for international law and it is hard to predict where it draws the line, it is unlikely that these sovereign bases will be formally pursued. This would involve too much time-consuming backlash. A more likely outcome is the layered expansion of a US military presence based on existing frameworks, which could eventually turn into some form of symbolic annexation. In this case, there is no legal transfer of sovereignty and no new US state, but enough visible American presence and control that Greenland starts to look and feel like a strategic asset. Greenland grapples with limited infrastructure and if the US would operate or fund the island’s best runways, ports, fuel storage, search-and-rescue assets, satellite communications, and weather systems., the US gains leverage without needing ownership. This, paired with official language describing Greenland as “indispensable to homeland defense” or “our northern frontier”, pulls the island de facto into the US national security map. Caution is therefore warranted. (Eye on the Arctic, The Conversation, The Guardian)
Nunavut Grapples with Food Spoilage Issues
Eye on the Arctic reported on May 8 that food spoilage is a recurring issue in Nunavut as a result of expensive and unreliable transport and a lack of freezer space or broken infrastructure at transit points such as airports. Packaging challenges were also cited as contributing to the problem since traditionally harvested ‘country food’ is often shipped in cardboard boxes lacking proper sealing or insulation. (Eye on the Arctic)
Take 4: Food insecurity is a notable issue in Nunavut which affects roughly 70% of Inuit households. The excessive cost of store-bought food partly explains this. Due to the remoteness of communities and the lack of roads between them, goods are mainly transported via plane or ship. It is thus not uncommon to pay more than CA$50 for one watermelon. This is further exacerbated by the limited opportunities of locally growing fresh produce due to the short growing season and extreme weather. Climate change puts another layer of strain on this. Melting sea ice and thawing permafrost change the natural habitats of Arctic species and disrupt traditional hunting and fishing practices. Nunavut is thus definitely not in a position to deal with high levels of food spoilage, yet this is a growing issue. The sharing of traditionally sourced country food such as seals, caribou, and fish with relatives in other communities is a core part of Inuit life. There has also been an increase in food products ordered from other communities due governmental hunting restrictions. But proper food distribution between settlements and regions is challenging. Issues with long handling times and limited freezer space at transit points are compounded by faulty or broken freezers and limited community capacity to repair them. As such, governmental discussions around food security and food sovereignty should not focus only on access to any kind of food, but also the availability of traditional products and how preventable issues like food spoilage can be adequately addressed. (Eye on the Arctic, Seeds of Diversity Canada, The Conversation)
Norway Proposes Talks with Russia on Maritime Safety in the Arctic
Fakti.bg reported on May 14 that Norway is seeking to hold operational and strategic meetings with Russia on maritime security. Rune Harstad, spokesman for the Norwegian Armed Forces originally told Izvestia (Russian newspaper) that the meetings, in accordance with an existing bilateral agreement on incidents at sea, would be targeted towards ensuring the safety of Norwegian and Russian personnel and vessels operating near one another in the region. (Fakti.bg)
Take 5: As much as Western cooperation with Russia has halted since 2022, some functional cooperation in the Arctic has remained. While Norway has largely adhered to the sanctions imposed on its neighbor, it has maintained essential exceptions for issues related to fisheries management, border control, and search-and-rescue. The High North is a complex region where the Arctic states are in relatively close proximity to one another. Navigation is extremely difficult, and infrastructure is scarce. The fragile environment also reacts differently to issues such as oil spills, which require complex and time-sensitive clean-up operations. As such, there continues to be a necessity for practical cooperation, perhaps explaining why the Arctic Council, a format uniting seven NATO members and Russia, has not ceased to exist. Ideological and moral considerations aside, both sides recognize the transnational challenges inherent to the Arctic and the need to maintain some form of basic cooperation. Talks at the political level have been halted since 2022, but at the technical and working group level, collaboration has resumed on topics related to risk management, disaster control, and monitoring and assessment. This is in part due to the efforts of the Norwegian Arctic Council Chairship, which established new guidelines to enable working group activities through written communication, later followed by a resumption of virtual working group meetings in 2024. It appears that some form of “Arctic exceptionalism” is thus perhaps still alive. (Harvard Belfer Center, Fakti.bg, Polar Research)