European countries call for strengthening the European Union's presence in the Arctic amid tensions with Russia and Trump's threats

On Monday, twelve European countries called on the European Union to strengthen its presence in the Arctic region, which is witnessing severe geopolitical tensions amid Russian threats and the ambitions expressed by US President Donald Trump.

A joint statement issued by these countries, including France, Denmark, Sweden, Germany and Greece, at the conclusion of a summit held in northern Finland, said: “We call on the European Union to play a more strategic and proactive role in the European Arctic region.”

Trump's repeated threats to annex Greenland, a vast autonomous Danish region, to US sovereignty has sparked a diplomatic crisis among Washington's allies.

Although the severity of these threats has decreased since the beginning of the year, European Union countries are determined to strengthen their presence in the region, fully aware of the presence of a hostile neighbor on the other side of Finland's long eastern border.

Pointing to “the significant and long-term threat posed by Russia,” the countries stressed that “Moscow’s ambitions to increase its influence in the Arctic, and its hostility towards Europe, including escalating multi-vessel activities, highlight the need to strengthen EU Arctic policy.”

The list of officials attending the summit included German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen, European Union foreign policy chief Kaya Kallas, and European Council President Antonio Costa, in addition to leaders from countries such as Romania and Greece.

Costa said: “What is happening here is not a regional issue, but a European issue.”

Environmental concerns

This summit, during which no official decisions were scheduled, comes at a time when the European Commission is expected to present a new strategy for the Arctic within weeks, which will guide the Union’s approach to the region in the coming years.

Countries and leaders can still express their opinions on the final document. In this regard, Thomas Tikkanen, chief advisor on European affairs to Finnish Prime Minister Petteri Urpo, who initiated the summit, told Agence France-Presse that “this meeting comes at a very appropriate time.” He added: “The idea is basically to strengthen the European Union’s common strategic approach towards the Arctic under these circumstances, as the geopolitical and economic importance of the region is increasing significantly.”

Interest in the region has increased significantly since the European Union adopted its latest policy on the Arctic in 2021, which was reflected in the number of high-level guests attending from countries that do not fall within the scope of the Arctic.

"The security environment has changed a lot, and there has been great interest in the region recently," Tikkanen said.

The leaders discussed topics ranging from economic interests to security issues. Experts estimate that the Arctic region is witnessing a rise in temperatures at a rate approximately four times faster than the global average as a result of climate change, leading to serious consequences for the environment and the livelihoods of local residents alike.

With the melting of sea ice, countries such as Russia, China and the United States have intensified their activities in the region, competing for control of natural resources and new maritime navigation routes.

In August, China and South Korea sent container ships in an attempt to cross the “Northern Sea Route,” which is located within Russian waters, in order to test the feasibility of using it in light of the passage remaining free of ice for longer periods year after year.

Earlier this year, President Trump stressed the need for Washington to control the island of Greenland for reasons he said were related to national security, although he ultimately ruled out the idea of ​​annexing it by force.

Shortly thereafter, in a move that appeared aimed at appeasing Trump, NATO launched a new mission to enhance security in the Arctic region.

During a visit to the vast island on September 7, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen announced an aid package for Greenland worth 200 million euros ($232 million), pledging that the European Union would have “a greater presence and deeper engagement in Greenland and the Arctic region.”

In January, a “high-level working group” including representatives of Denmark, the United States and Greenland was formed to address US concerns, but only scant information has been released about the progress of the negotiations since then.

On the sidelines of the Rovaniemi summit, the Danish Prime Minister expressed her “optimism” that the talks launched between Denmark, the United States, and Greenland might lead to a settlement of the dispute.

Frederiksen told reporters: “The working group is still carrying out its tasks. “So it is too early to draw any conclusions, but I am very optimistic that we can find a solution.”

A Russian strike that targeted a passenger train near the Ukrainian border with Poland on Sunday revived fears that the repercussions of the war are getting closer to NATO territory, at a time when European countries are facing a series of drones, sabotage operations, and electronic attacks, of which Moscow is accused of being behind a number of them.

A Russian drone hit a passenger train locomotive in the Jahudin area, about two kilometers from the Polish border, shortly after a train carrying Western figures passed, including former British Prime Minister Boris Johnson, who was British Prime Minister when Russia began its invasion of Ukraine in February 2022. Polish Foreign Minister Radoslaw Sikorski described the attack as an escalation, while Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk warned against intensifying Russian movements during the weeks and months. Coming, at a time when French Foreign Minister Jean-Noel Barrot said that Moscow seeks to “intimidate and divide the Europeans.”

Pressures approaching NATO's borders

Targeting Ukrainian territory bordering NATO countries does not constitute an attack on the alliance, but the recurrence of incidents near its borders coincides with mounting fears that a mistaken strike or violation of airspace could lead to a more serious test of the limits of confrontation between Moscow and the West.

The American Wall Street Journal indicates that over the past two years, 16 countries in NATO have recorded violations of drones or found their wreckage, while in many cases it is difficult to determine the source of these drones and the method of their launch. These operations put European countries in front of a dilemma regarding how to respond to activities that often remain below the level of a direct military attack.

These fears were strengthened in early September, after Germany held Russia responsible for attempting to target Leipzig-Halle Airport with a drone loaded with explosives in August. Berlin said that investigations indicated that the Russian state provided expertise and equipment for the operation and recruited people to carry it out.

Moscow denies several Western accusations against it of carrying out sabotage and attacks inside Europe, while NATO countries consider that Russian activities include, in addition to the marches, electronic attacks, acts of sabotage, electronic interference, and disinformation campaigns.

Gray area

The sensitivity of these operations lies in the fact that they take place within what is known as the “gray zone” between peace and war. It allows putting pressure on opponents by means that remain below the threshold of traditional war, and in some cases it is difficult to attribute it directly to the party behind it.

The Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), an American research center, indicates that these activities, which are also described as “hybrid warfare,” include influence operations, cyberattacks, electronic warfare, sabotage, and covert operations. It allows Moscow to exert pressure on its opponents while reducing the risk of causing a conventional military confrontation.

The French newspaper Le Monde reported that the attempt to target Leipzig prompted European countries to search for more effective means to deter Russia, amid Danish intelligence warnings against Moscow recruiting ordinary people through social media to collect information that could be used to plan acts of sabotage.

The ambiguity surrounding the source of some operations gives Moscow room for maneuver. It is difficult to prove her responsibility conclusively. Proving responsibility for a cyberattack or an operation carried out by an agent is more difficult than determining the source of a missile or military aircraft, and a military response to a limited incident may carry risks of escalation disproportionate to its size.

When will NATO move?

Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty does not mean that every incident occurring on the territory of a member state automatically leads to the alliance entering into war. It stipulates that an armed attack on a member is considered an attack on all, but member states specify the nature of the measures they deem necessary to assist the targeted state.

NATO also confirmed that hybrid operations could, in certain circumstances, reach the level of an armed attack and prompt the Alliance to activate Article 5, but determining this is subject to the Allies’ assessment of each case.

Here emerges one of the most important dilemmas facing the West. Ignoring limited Russian operations may encourage Moscow to further test NATO's limits, while a military response to them may turn a limited incident into a direct confrontation between Russia and the alliance.

A test of Western deterrence

Russian pressure prompted NATO to strengthen its defenses on its eastern flank since the Russian invasion of Ukraine, while the accession of Finland and Sweden expanded the alliance's area and increased the direct borders between it and Russia.

The war also prompted European countries to raise their defense spending and enhance infrastructure protection and capabilities against drones and electronic attacks.

As the strikes move closer to the alliance's borders and accusations of hybrid Russian operations within it increase, the risk of Russian pressure reaching a level that could push NATO to a tougher collective response increases. With the narrowing of the margin between Russian pressure that does not require a direct response from NATO; This may prompt the alliance to respond directly. Miscalculation remains one of the paths that may push the Russian-Western confrontation to a level that neither party seeks to reach.