STUDY GUIDE

UNSC

COMMITTEE:- United Nations Security

Council
AGENDA:- Addressing Imminent Strategic
Militarisation of the Arctic Circle
THEME:- Concordia crescimus
BUREAU:- Suaysh Jalan, Raskhit Shrimal,
Savit Agrawal
INDEX
Letter from the Executive Board................................................................................................ 3
Committee background...............................................................................................................4
Introduction to the Agenda.........................................................................................................5
Timeline........................................................................................................................................ 6
The Arctic..................................................................................................................................... 7
Contemporary Military Buildup and Strategic Activities in the Arctic Circle.........................8
Present Agreements.......................................................................................................... 8
Territorial Claims in the Arctic Region................................................................................ 9
Hybrid And Traditional Threats In The Militarization Of The Arctic.................................. 10
Addressing the Root Causes Behind the Militarization of the Arctic:..................................12
Climate Change And Resource Accessibility...................................................................12
Geopolitical Competition and Power Projection...............................................................14
Weaknesses in Regional Governance.............................................................................15
Stakeholders:............................................................................................................................. 16
Russian and Chinese Strategic Convergence In The Arctic:........................................... 16
NATO and Its Members’ Activities In The Arctic.............................................................. 17
1)NATO-..................................................................................................................... 17
2) The United States of America:...............................................................................17
3)Denmark:................................................................................................................ 18
Implications of Militarization and Associated Strategic Activities in the Arctic Circle.......19
Heightened Geopolitical Tensions And Risk Of Conflict.................................................. 19
Miscellaneous Implications.............................................................................................. 20
Conclusion................................................................................................................................. 21
Question A Directive Must Answer.......................................................................................... 22
Keywords....................................................................................................................................23
Bibliography...............................................................................................................................24
Letter from the Executive Board
Dear Delegates,
A very warm Namaste to everyone. We are thrilled to welcome you all once again for the
Shishukunj International School North Campus, Model United Nation 2025. We have a high
regard for serving as the executive bureau of this year’s United Nations Security Council
(UNSC). We will make sure to make this year’s experience an exceptional and memorable one
for all of you.

The agenda that will be taken up for this year’s conference in UNSC is a vast topic that the
delegates will discuss and that is, “Addressing Imminent Strategic Militarisation of the Arctic
Circles”

We, as the bureau, advise you to go through the study guide and rules of procedure thoroughly.
We also encourage you to learn from your experiences and put forward your diplomatic side. In
this two-day conference, we urge you to come up with extraordinary solutions. We wish you to
expand your research with the sub-agendas mentioned in the guide and strengthen your research
for better flow of the committee.

We would urge you not to use any AI tool as the primary source for your research and refrain
from plagiarism as it is not accepted. Additionally, The case studies are just for your reference
and are not to be discussed as subtopics in moderated caucuses.

Furthermore, we will be looking forward to meeting and interacting with you all. We are always
there to lend a helping hand to you and resolve your doubts. We hope you become exquisite
global change- makers and leaders in the conference.
So let's work together to create this conference remarkable with your dedication and
collaboration. We await you!

Warm Regards!

Chairperson- Suyash Jalan

Vice- Chairperson- Rakshit Shrimal
Rapporteur- Savit Agrawal
Committee background
The United Nations Security Council (UNSC) , founded on 24 October 1945 is one of the 5 organs of
the United Nations.
It consists of 15 member states. Out of these, five member states have veto power ( People's
Republic of China. French Republic, Russian Federation, United Kingdom of Great Britain
and Northern Ireland and United States of America), while the other non-permanent ten
member states are elected regionally by the General Assembly for a two-year term. The
United Nations Security Council has the responsibility to take care of keeping global peace
and security in check.

The UNSC holds a regular meeting at the United Nations building in New York. The United Nations
Security Council functions as a forum for diplomatic discussions and resolution of conflicts, aiming to
settle disputes and uphold peace. Its choices hold considerable importance and impact in molding the
direction of global relations and tackling dangers to worldwide harmony. The Security Council can
convene whenever necessary, especially during a time of crisis or emergency, and its result must be
followed by all United Nations members.

One of the first actions undertaken by the United Nations Security Council in a situation where there is a
"Threat to Peace and Security," to encourage nations to settle the dispute through peaceful means. refers
to discussions. The UNSC is granted numerous authorities to ensure international security. It can carry out
investigations, settle disputes, enforce penalties, authorize the use of force, establish peacekeeping
operations, and propose measures to member states. 1

[Link]
ations_building_high_resolution_desktop_2972x1980_wallpaper-321176-2_6.jpg?itok=W-Ic3D6Q
Introduction to the Agenda
The Arctic Circle contains the northernmost regions of Europe, Asia, and North America, a vast
and unique area characterized by its extreme climate and rich biodiversity. This unique
geography has become a focal point for a lot of global issues, including environmental changes
and geopolitical tensions. One of the major factors leading to the militarization of the Arctic is
climate change, which is leading to the rapid melting of sea ice.

As temperatures increase, frozen waterways are becoming navigable, resulting in new maritime
routes and previously undiscovered natural resources, including oil, gas, and minerals. Nations
around the Arctic Circle want to satisfy both economic interests and the desire to assert territorial
claims over these valuable resources. This has led to heightened competition among Arctic
nations and non-Arctic entities alike, intensifying geopolitical tensions in the region and raising
concerns over the potential for conflict.

In light of these challenges, the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) plays a vital role in
efforts to de-escalate tensions. The UNSC aims to foster cooperation that transcends national
interests, paving the way for a secure and stable Arctic region.
Timeline
●​ 9 February 1920 – Svalbard Treaty signed
●​ 1945 – As part of its Cold War containment strategy, the U.S. began building up military
infrastructure in the Arctic.
●​ 1947 – 1991 – Druing the Cold War Period, the Arctic became a heavily militarized zone.
●​ 1951–1952 – Construction of Thule Air Base, which is one of the northernmost U.S.
military installations.
●​ March 1959 – The first U.S. submarine (SSN 578) to surface through Arctic ice.
●​ 1959 – Alaska becomes a U.S. state enhancing U.S.’s strategic military reach in the
Arctic.
●​ 16 November 1994 – UNCLOS enters into force
●​ 19 September 1996 – Arctic Council founded via Ottawa Declaration
●​ Since 2005 – Russia reactivated 50 Soviet-era bases and constructed new installations.
●​ 2005–2017 – Even before formalizing its Arctic strategy, China invests over $1.4
Trillion in Arctic economies.
●​ 2007 – Northwest Passage & Northern Sea Route observed as ice-free seasonally.
●​ 2008 – Illulissat Declaration signed by Arctic coastal states
●​ 2010 – Barents Sea Boundary Agreement signed (Russia–Norway)
●​ 26 January 2018 – China publishes its first Arctic Policy White Paper.
●​ March 2024 – Nordic Response is a military exercise involving NATO hosted by
Norway that occurs every other year.
●​ July–August 2024 – Three Chinese research vessels operated north of the Arctic Circle,
for the first time simultaneously. Concerns have been raised about the “dual-use” risks
posed by China’s polar research
●​ 13 September 2024 – The "Pacific Patrol 2024" exercises took place.
●​ June 2023 – present – Russia-Ukraine War has significantly strained Arctic cooperation,
especially within the Arctic Council.​
The Arctic
The Arctic is a geographical region around the Earth’s North Pole, encompassing all those within
the Arctic Circle, which is approximately located at the latitude of 66°33′ north. Within this
circle are the Arctic Ocean basin and northern Canada, Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway,
Russia, Sweden, and the United States. Alongside this, it contains the North Pole as well. In
addition, the Arctic Ocean is mostly made up of salt water with shallow depth, covered in ice,
with a number of undiscovered phenomena.2 3

The history of the Arctic is vast and highly detailed. For

millennia, indigenous civilizations inhabited the Arctic.
During the Cold War, the region became a critical arena
for U.S.-Soviet strategic competition. The Soviet Union
used the Arctic for advanced military deployments and
weapons testing (such as the Tsar Bomba).4 The U.S.
responded with major defense installations like the
Distant Early Warning (DEW) Line and bases in Alaska
and Greenland. The proximity of the superpowers and the
presence of nuclear forces made the Arctic a key part of
the doctrine of Mutually Assured Destruction. 5

With the Soviet collapse, the Arctic’s geostrategic

intensity waned. The region moved away from being a
militarized frontier to becoming a "zone of peace and
fruitful cooperation," exemplified by the creation of the Arctic Council in 1996. While some
military infrastructure remained, there was a marked reduction in military posturing and
exercises.
Now, rapid warming and technological advancements have made vast natural resources more
accessible, renewing global interest. The Arctic is now a core of 21st-century geopolitical rivalry,
with the involvement of not just Arctic states but also external actors drawn by economic and
strategic opportunities.
2
[Link]
2rMPNI8w7ojDX8m_rzx&ust=1747837593412000&source=images&cd=vfe&opi=89978449&ved=0CBEQjRxqFwoTCLiR9Mi
gso0DFQAAAAAdAAAAABAE
3
[Link]
4

[Link]
ilitary,natural%20and%20human%2Dmade%20catastrophes
5

[Link]
ilitary,natural%20and%20human%2Dmade%20catastrophes
Contemporary Military Buildup and Strategic Activities
in the Arctic Circle
Present Agreements
Though there are no treaties that explicitly prohibit or restrict military activities in the Arctic, a
range of important treaties and agreements shape how states behave in the region and influence
military decisions.
The Svalbard Treaty (1920) grants Norway sovereignty over the Svalbard archipelago but
forbids military use of the islands and grants equal rights to all signatories for fishing, hunting,
and resource extraction in Svalbard’s territorial waters, setting a precedent for peaceful
development in certain Arctic territories.6

The Ottawa Declaration (1996) established the Arctic Council, promoting cooperation and
peaceful development among Arctic states, but it intentionally excludes military security from its
mandate. 7

Through the Ilulissat Declaration (2008), five Arctic coastal states (Canada, Denmark, Norway,
Russia, U.S.) affirmed that existing international law, especially UNCLOS, is sufficient for
resolving Arctic disputes and rejected the need for a new treaty similar to the Antarctic Treaty.8

The Search and Rescue Agreement (2011) is the first legally binding pan-Arctic treaty,
harmonizing search and rescue operations and fostering collaboration and communication among
the eight Arctic states. Also, there exist several agreements focused on environmental concerns,
but none focusing on militarization in the region.

[Link]
0Exhibits/[Link]
7
[Link]
8
[Link]
Territorial Claims in the Arctic Region
There are several significant overlapping maritime claims in the Arctic, reflecting the region’s
complex geography and the interests of multiple states. A prominent dispute involves the conflict
over 1.2 million km² of Arctic Ocean seabed9, where Russia, Canada, and Denmark (via
Greenland) have all submitted overlapping claims to the Lomonosov Ridge and adjacent areas,
each arguing that the ridge is a natural extension of their continental shelf. These claims are still
under review by the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf.

The United States and Canada have an unresolved boundarydispute in the Beaufort Sea, where
their Exclusive Economic Zones (EEZs) and continental shelf claims overlap, and negotiations
continue through a joint task force.10 The Northwest Passage is another area of contention, as
Canada claims it as internal waters while the US and other countries regard it as an international
strait, leading to overlapping claims over navigation rights.11

The Lincoln Sea and Nares Strait dispute, primarily focused on Hans Island, involved a
disagreement between Canada and Denmark. The issue stemmed from the 1973 treaty, which left
a small area of the Lincoln Sea and Nares Strait undefined, including Hans Island. The dispute
was resolved in 2022 with the agreement to draw a border across Hans Island, dividing it almost
equally. 12

While Norway and Russia largely settled their Barents Sea boundary in 2010, ongoing
cooperation is required for managing shared resources, and minor issues persist.13 Norway’s
interpretation of the Svalbard Treaty is disputed by other signatories regarding rights to resources
beyond the territorial sea. 14

These overlapping claims are managed through international legal frameworks, negotiations, and
bilateral or multilateral agreements, but as of 2025, about 2.8 million km² of disputed Arctic
territory remains.

9
[Link]
10
[Link]
11
[Link]
12
[Link]
13
[Link]
14

[Link]
[Link]
 Hybrid And Traditional Threats In The Militarization Of The Arctic

In recent times, other than the traditional installation of military infrastructure, the Arctic has
become a ground for hybrid threats, too.
Climate change is frequently regarded as a threat multiplier in conflicts because it alters natural
habitat and intensifies competition for resources. Similarly, the effects of climate change in the
Arctic are making the geopolitical environment there more unpredictable, especially when
combined with international strategic competition.

The advancements in military technology have enabled nations to extend their military presence
into areas that were once difficult to access. For example, Finland has accumulated extensive
experience over the years in executing complex military operations in the Arctic environment,
where temperatures range from -40°C in winter to +35°C in summer. 15

Hybrid activities observed in the Arctic include information operations (such as disinformation),
cyber assaults, physical disruptions (aimed at pipelines and underwater cables), GPS
interference, alongside conventional strategies such as spying and energy intimidation by several
states.16

Dual-use infrastructure is an important feature of Arctic militarization. In the Arctic,

infrastructure such as ports, airstrips, energy systems, and satellite ground stations are often
designed to serve overlapping military, civilian, and scientific purposes. Such facilities are used
as a cover for military activities or a combination of both. For example, Canada’s Arctic strategy
focuses on the deployment of multi-use infrastructure like small modular nuclear reactors at
military bases, which provide power for defense operations, local communities, and research
operations.17 Similarly, Russia’s modernization along the NSR has involved reactivating
Soviet-era bases and constructing new facilities that support both search and rescue missions,
scientific research, and military objectives. China has established dual-use facilities that cater to
both military and civilian needs. Although dual-use facilities involving scientific and intelligence
collection activities have been undertaken by all major parties with research stations in
Antarctica, expanding Chinese surveillance activities under the cover of civilian research is a
growing strategic challenge to overcome.18

15
[Link]
0much%20smaller%20than%20its%20eastern%20neighbor%2C,community%20is%20taking%20lessons%20from%20Finnish%
20commandos
16
[Link]
ming,situational%20awareness%20of%20these%20vulnerabilities
17
[Link]
18
[Link]
ia-boundary-the-arctic-and-antarctica#_edn91
Joint military exercises in the Arctic have become increasingly frequent. For example, Joint
Viking 25 is a multilateral exercise hosted by Norway, with the goal of enhancing allied
interoperability, training on protecting NATO's northern region, and testing Norway's ability to
receive allied reinforcements.19 20

19
[Link]
20
[Link]
Addressing the Root Causes Behind the Militarization of
the Arctic:
The Arctic Region is undergoing unprecedented militarization as global powers try to gather
strategic advantage in this transforming environment. This militarization arises due to
multifaceted reasons that have intensified in recent times. Climate change has dramatically
altered the Arctic landscape, revealing previously inaccessible resources and opening new
shipping routes. Geopolitical competition has increased, too. These developments unfold
against governance frameworks ill-equipped to address security concerns. A combination of
these factors has transformed the once peaceful "High North, Low Tension" region into a center
of increasing military and strategic activity.

Climate Change And Resource Accessibility

Climate change is altering the landscape of the Arctic at a concerning rate. According to studies,
the region is warming three to four times faster than the global average, resulting in a dramatic
change in environmental conditions.21
This fast change is creating new opportunities for military operations. The harsh weather
conditions of the Arctic are changing, affecting military mobility and survivability. As the ice
cover reduces, previously inaccessible areas are becoming available for navigation, resource
extraction, and other activities.

The Arctic's vast natural resources are becoming increasingly accessible due to melting ice,
intensifying competition among nations seeking to exploit these valuable deposits.
The region contains an estimated 90 billion barrels of undiscovered oil and 1,669 trillion cubic
feet of natural gas, equivalent to 22% of the world’s untapped fossil fuel resources. These
reserves are valued at approximately $13.5 trillion for oil (at $150/barrel) and $6.7 trillion for
gas (at $4/MMBtu22) and have become increasingly accessible due to the warming of the
Arctic.23 24
This economic incentive is driving nations to secure their interests in the region, often through
military means.

21
[Link]
22
Stands for British Thermal Unit
23
[Link]
24
[Link]
The waterways in the Arctic were of little interest to shipping when thick “multiyear” sea ice
restricted navigation along the northern coasts. But now, climate change is causing the ice to thin
and recede. Since the summer of 2007, both the Northwest Passage and Northern Sea
Route(NSR) have been temporarily ice-free. Analysis suggests that under continued climate
change, these routes will become increasingly navigable and economically viable.
The NSR presents a shortcut for the transfer of goods between Europe and Asia and thus offers
significant cost savings for shipping. In theory, distance savings along the NSR can be as high as
50% compared to the currently used shipping lanes via Suez or Panama. Hence, the NSR along
Russia's Arctic coast has become a particular focus of development and securitization. The NSR
handled a record 37.8–37.9 million tonnes of cargo in 2024. This surpasses the previous record
by more than 1.6 million tonnes and reflects a continuing upward trend in Arctic shipping. 25 26
The opening of these new maritime routes and the increased accessibility to the resources of the
Arctic has increased geopolitical tensions as countries seek to control, leading to increased
military presence in the region.

25
[Link]
26
[Link]
Geopolitical Competition and Power Projection
The Arctic has become a hub of militarization due to modern geopolitical competition. Nations
are increasingly interested in accumulating control (often via military) in the region for its
resource wealth and strategic shipping routes. This competition is rooted in historical rivalries,
intensified by climate-driven accessibility and modern military infrastructure.

Russia has reactivated 50 Soviet-era bases since 2005 and constructed new installations. On the
other hand, the U.S. maintains multiple Arctic military bases, including the one at Pituffik and
NATO’s Arctic infrastructure includes several infrastructure and operations like radars, naval
facilities, and air command to monitor and deter activity. Interestingly, despite lacking Arctic
territory, China has invested hefty sums in the Arctic and advocated for “Polar Silk Road,” which
is an initiative within the framework of the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) aiming to enhance
connectivity and access to the arctic, aiding in trade and development through use of Arctic
shipping routes namely, the Northwestern and the Northeastern passage.
Weaknesses in Regional Governance
The Arctic Council, while serving as an important forum for regional cooperation, explicitly
excludes military security from its mandate. 27
Unlike in Antarctica, where the Antarctic Treaty System regulates international cooperation,
cooperation in the Arctic, The Arctic lacks a comprehensive governance structure specifically
designed to address security concerns. Instead, it operates under a patchwork of legal
frameworks, including the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS),
bilateral agreements, and informal arrangements.
The Council on Foreign Relations has noted the need for a cohesive approach to address the
security-related, economic, environmental, and sociocultural issues. 28
Some efforts have been made at cooperation, but militarization and inconsistent treaty
participation continue to create legal gray areas across the 2.8 million km² of disputed Arctic
territory.29
Following the Russia-Ukraine War in February 2022, the Arctic Council paused cooperation with
Moscow after it invaded Ukraine, putting a third of the Council's 130 projects on hold because of
direct Russian involvement. Following the war, activities with Russia of regional forums such as
the Arctic Council, the Barents Euro-Atlantic Council (BEAC), and the Council of the Baltic Sea
States (CBSS) have either been significantly scaled down or suspended.30 While a partial
resumption of certain non-political activities was announced in June 2022, the Council's
effectiveness in addressing the full spectrum of Arctic challenges has been compromised.
The Russia-Ukraine War has shattered the perception of the Arctic as a zone of exceptionalism
where cooperation could continue regardless of tensions elsewhere in the world. 31 This
breakdown in cooperation has created a governance vacuum where military competition can
flourish in the absence of robust diplomatic engagement.

27
[Link]
28
[Link]
29

[Link]
he-arctic/
30
[Link]
31

[Link]
2024-05-14/
Stakeholders :
Russian and Chinese Strategic Convergence In The Arctic:
Russia is the most dominant Arctic state, both geographically and strategically, and has made
extensive claims and investments in the region.
Furthered by the associated geopolitical and economic motives, Russia claims a vast area of the
Arctic seabed, including territory up to and beyond the North Pole, based on the argument that
the Lomonosov Ridge and Mendeleev Ridge are natural extensions of the Siberian continental
shelf. Russia claims up to 1.2 million square kilometers of additional seabed beyond its
200-nautical-mile Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ). Russia asserts that the NSR falls under its
national jurisdiction. It claims the right to regulate and control all transit.32 Russia has invested
heavily in ports, infrastructure, and vessels to develop and protect the NSR. It aims to increase
NSR cargo traffic to 200 million tonnes by 2030.33
Having control over about 55% of the Arctic Ocean coastline34, Russia has reactivated 50
Soviet-era military bases since 200535 and has constructed new installations including Wrangel
Island (2014), and Kotelny Island hosting S-400 missile systems, Bastion-P coastal defenses,
anti-aircraft systems, and radar stations. Its Northern Fleet operates over 40 icebreakers
(including a few nuclear-powered). 36

The Chinese strategic interest in the Arctic encompasses access to resources, scientific research,
and influence over emerging shipping routes. Despite not being an Arctic state, China has
declared itself a "near-Arctic state" and included the region in its Belt and Road Initiative as the
"Polar Silk Road”. China secured 10% equity in Arctic LNG 2.37 China invests heavily in Arctic
infrastructure such as harbour-related infrastructure and research stations (Xue Long 2
icebreaker) that serve commercial, scientific, and potential military functions. China has
increased the presence of its coast guard in the Arctic, conducting joint patrols and joint
exercises with Russia. 38 39 40

32
[Link]
20the%20legitimate%20navigation,to%20be%20governed%20by%20an%20international%20regime
33
[Link]
state%20atomi%D1%81%20energy,company%20Rosneft%27s%20Vostok%20Oil%20project
34
[Link]
35
[Link]
36
[Link]
37
[Link]
38
[Link]
39
[Link]
40
[Link]
NATO and Its Members’ Activities In The Arctic

1)NATO-
NATO has increased its military activities in the Arctic, highlighting the region's rapidly
increasing strategic importance and geopolitical friction. Such activities include joint military
exercises. One notable example was the Arctic Challenge 2023 joint military exercise which was
hosted by Finland, Norway and Sweden, brought together around 3,000 soldiers from 14 nations
from 29 May to 9 June 2023.41 This exercise marked Finland’s largest modern land-force drill
above the Arctic Circle, underscoring the readiness and interoperability of NATO allies in the
region. Two of NATO’s largest exercises in recent years—Trident Juncture and Cold Response –
were in the High North.42

2) The United States of America:

A significant event highlighting the USA’s interest in the Arctic was the transition of Alaska
from a U.S. territory to a state in 1959.43 Recognizing Alaska's pivotal geographical position, the
U.S. aimed to create a detection system to monitor possible Soviet aircraft intrusions. This led to
the establishment of the Distant Early Warning (DEW) Line.

The U.S. Armed Forces recognized that maintaining a presence in Greenland was essential, so
with permission from Denmark, the United States established Pituffik Space Base, formerly
Thule Air Base, which is critical for Ballistic missile detection and space surveillance.44

In the last 70 years, the U.S. Submarine Force has completed approximately 100 Arctic
exercises to ensure readiness against any enemy action.45 These exercises, along with the military
buildup, serve not just a defensive purpose but also act as a demonstration of the U.S.
commitment to safeguard its national interests.
41
[Link]
#:~:text=ACE%2023%20is%20hosted%20by,the%202004%20Nordic%20Air%20Meet
42
[Link]
,including%20in%20the%20High%20North.
43
[Link]
xt=The%201959%20Alaska%20Statehood%20Act,to%20become%20economically%20self%2Dsupporting
44
[Link]
45
[Link]
#:~:text=For%20more%20than%2070%20years,Homeland%20Defense%20exercise%20ICEX%20Training
3)Denmark:

Denmark's Arctic claim is closely tied to its relation with Greenland, an autonomous part of the
Kingdom of Denmark. The relation is central; without Greenland, Denmark would most
probably experience a loss of role and influence among the Arctic nations.. As a gesture towards
its Arctic role, Denmark has pledged a massive 14.6 billion kroner (or around $2.05 billion) to
boost regional security.46 This emphasizes the complex situation of defense, diplomacy, and
economics in the Arctic as countries position themselves to maximize new opportunities.
Overall, Denmark's strategic moves emphasize the importance of Greenland. Denmark is
increasing its military presence in the Arctic for its safety, resources, and new routes.

46
[Link]
Implications of Militarization and Associated Strategic
Activities in the Arctic Circle
Heightened Geopolitical Tensions And Risk Of Conflict

In recent times, due to a variety of motivators and threats, the Arctic geopolitical contest has
become fiercer and complicated. To protect their interests, claim their sovereignty, and expand
their hegemony over resources, states have made the Arctic a new arena of power competition.
Now, gaining future access to valuable resources, strengthening bargaining power, and
discouraging opposition to claims over territories are all seen as benefits of military development
in the Arctic. Military modernization and the construction of military installations, deploying
sophisticated weapons and intelligence networks, and the frequency of military exercises are all
on the rise in the region.
Conflicts in Arctic states regarding the overlapping claims to the continental shelf and exclusive
economic zones, territorial conflicts are the main reason for geopolitical tensions. Chokepoints
like the GIUK gap have also re-emerged as strategically significant.
Rising tensions everywhere in the world drive the Arctic's heightened militarization and rivalries.
The security environment has become more unpredictable and potentially dangerous with the
deterioration of great power dynamics and the emergence of rising powers.
In short, the Arctic is no longer a remote or distant place but a central theater of geopolitical
rivalry, not only for Arctic nations but globally.
Miscellaneous Implications
Arctic militarization has far-reaching impacts on the environment, science, and indigenous
cultures. Large areas of land are routinely fenced off as a result of military infrastructure,
drastically limiting indigenous peoples' access to traditional ground. This exclusion does not
simply dislocate livelihood but is also in conflict with cultural activity and the passing on of
Indigenous knowledge. Social and cultural harm has been inflicted in the long term through the
forced eviction of locals for military base development.47

Military bases, activities, and mining also often introduce pollution in the form of chemicals and
radioactive matter into vulnerable Arctic ecosystems, threatening the wildlife and health of
indigenous residents alike. Large-scale exploitation of resources, commonly associated with
state programs and the military, also serves to amplify the effects by disrupting migration
patterns and severely degrading the environment, resulting in loss of biodiversity. 48

Increased militarization also affects scientific studies, as it may restrict access to significant sites,
hinder global cooperation, and obscure the lines between civilian and military targets. It becomes
challenging to obtain critical environmental information.
Overall, militarization creates a loop of environmental injustice, cultural disruption, and
scientific issues that undermine the resilience and integrity of Arctic residents and ecosystems.

47
[Link]
[Link]
48
[Link]
Conclusion
The study guide highlights the various aspects of the Arctic militarization, including the threats it
poses. It emphasizes the importance of international cooperation and dialogue in addressing
these issues and urges the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) to take decisive action. By
fostering trust and constructive engagement, the UNSC aims to pave the way for a demilitarized
Arctic, ultimately striving for lasting peace and stability in the region.

We urge the delegate to provide practical, effective, and implementable solutions because we
think that only a comprehensive and inclusive political solution that addresses the root causes of
the militarization in the Arctic will bring about sustainable peace. The only way for the delegates
to produce the best broad proposals is through their passionate dedication and careful
consideration.
Question A Directive Must Answer
1. How should the international community prepare for both hybrid and non-traditional
threats in the Arctic?
2. Addressing the need for the introduction of a legally binding Arctic Demilitarization and
Security Treaty to ensure long-term regional stability?
3. How can confidence-building measures (CBMs) among Arctic and non-Arctic states be
implemented to reduce the risk of military escalation in the region?
4. In what ways can indigenous communities be involved in decision-making processes to
ensure that their rights and the fragile Arctic environment are protected from
militarization?
5. How can international mechanisms be reformed to resolve overlapping maritime and
territorial claims without resorting to militarization?
6. How can resource nationalism be balanced with international cooperation to curb
militarization?
7. How can the UNSC regulate Arctic military exercises conducted by member states?

​
Keywords

1.​ Geopolitical competition- Geopolitical competition refers to the rivalry between nations
and regions over influence, power, and resources on a global scale.
2.​ Northwest Passage- The Northwest Passage is a sea route through the Arctic, connecting
the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans north of North America
3.​ Northern Sea Route(NRS)- The Northern Sea Route (NSR), also known as the Northeast
Passage, is a shipping route in the Arctic Ocean that provides a shortcut between Europe
and the Asia-Pacific.
4.​ New Maritime Routes- These are the alternative routes to major chokepoints like the
Suez Canal, and routes that facilitate trade between specific regions like India, China, and
Southeast Asia.
5.​ United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS)- The United Nations
Convention on the Law of the Sea is an international agreement that establishes a legal
framework for marine and maritime activities. It's a comprehensive treaty outlining rules
for all uses of the oceans and their resources, including territorial limits, resources, and
marine environment protection.
6.​ Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ)- Exclusive Economic Zone is a region of the ocean
where a coastal state has special rights over the exploration and exploitation of marine
resources
7.​ Cyber assaults- Cyber assault is a broad term for any malicious act targeting a computer,
network, or system using digital means, with the intent to cause damage or harm
8.​ Choke points- Choke points are geographic locations where the flow of people and goods
can be constricted and choked off in the event of a conflict.
9.​ GIUK gap- The GIUK gap is an area in the northern Atlantic Ocean that forms a naval
choke point.
10.​Distant Early Warning (DEW) Line- The Distant Early Warning (DEW) Line was a

system of radar stations built by the United States and Canada during the Cold War to

detect potential air assaults from the north, primarily from the Soviet Union.
Bibliography
1.​ NATO - Homepage“Arctic remains essential to NATO's Deterrence and …
2.​ [Link]
i%20Infographics,geoeconomic%20benefits%20from%20the%20NSR.:
3.​ [Link]
4.​ [Link]
5.​ [Link]

6.​ [Link]

7.​ [Link]
8.​ [Link]

9.​ [Link]

xt=In%201977%2C%20Norway%20established%20a%20(200%2Dmile)%20%27fisheri

es,share%20of%20Arctic%20cod%20in%20Svalbard%20waters

10.​[Link]