The three-day 2026 Arctic Circle Assembly closed on the 10th in Reykjavik, capital of Iceland. The conference focused on Arctic security and defence, resource development, climate governance and other topics, with stark divergences between the United States and its allies. Analysts argue that this not only reflects marked disparities between the two sides in Arctic strategic planning, policymaking and development expectations, but also lays bare deepening rifts within the transatlantic partnership.

Division over Security: Whether to Scale up Military Commitment

Launched in 2013 by Olafur Ragnar Grimsson, then President of Iceland, the Arctic Circle Assembly convenes in Iceland every October. It serves as a major global platform for international dialogue on Arctic affairs. Regional security and defence stood as one of the core themes of this year’s gathering. Judging from statements by participants, the United States and its allies hold sharply contrasting views on the pivotal question of how to strengthen security guarantees for the Arctic.

The United States has long advocated expanding its military presence in the Arctic. U.S. officials at the forum stressed that only expanded military access can bring security to the Arctic. At the opening ceremony on the 8th, Mike Dunleavy, Governor of Alaska, said Washington was pouring billions of U.S. dollars into military deployment in the state and planned to work with allies to map out Arctic ports, airports and shipping systems that would serve both commercial transport and military support.

By contrast, America’s NATO allies attach greater importance to autonomy. Since returning to the White House in 2025, U.S. President Donald Trump has repeatedly voiced his ambition to acquire Greenland, an autonomous territory of Denmark. Although the United States, Denmark and Greenland reached a new security agreement in September this year, allied trust in Washington has yet to be restored. Mute Egede, Foreign Minister of Greenland’s autonomous government, stated at the opening ceremony that Greenlanders had endured immense pressure and uncertainty over the past period and would prioritise autonomy going forward. “We will not be spectators of our own future,” he remarked.

Canada’s relations with the United States deteriorated after Trump threatened to turn Canada into America’s “51st state” and impose steep tariffs on Canadian goods. In her opening address, Canadian Foreign Minister Anita Anand said the Arctic is not merely a strategic frontier, but a “homeland” for local residents. Canada is working with Nordic countries and other partners to pursue middle-power diplomacy, jointly safeguarding an Arctic of peace, security and respected sovereignty.

Zhao Long, Director of the Center for Marine and Polar Studies at the Shanghai Institute of International Studies, told reporters that Arctic affairs have become securitised in a broad sense driven by great-power politics. The United States and its allies do not share identical perceptions of external security threats. Fresh frictions between them make it harder for Washington to align allied positions on Arctic security.

Division over Economy: How to Distribute Development Gains

Arctic resource exploitation and economic development were also key discussion topics. Spurred by climate change, Arctic shipping, energy and critical mineral development have drawn growing global attention. During debates on this theme, the United States prioritised the strategic value of Arctic development, while its allies emphasised “benefits for local people”.

At the assembly, U.S. representatives pushed for expanded Arctic energy development and infrastructure construction. Governor Dunleavy said the Trump administration was advancing a transformation of Alaska’s development model to integrate defence build-up and resource exploitation. Thomas Dans, Chair of the U.S. Arctic Research Commission, also noted that U.S. investment in the Arctic was “unprecedented”.

U.S. allies, however, stressed autonomy and entitlement to economic gains from external cooperation in the Arctic. Greenland’s Foreign Minister Egede said, “The future of the Arctic cannot revolve only around what the world wants from the region; it must also account for what Arctic peoples seek.” He underscored that Arctic development must create opportunities for local inhabitants, and the inflow of external capital and security facilities must not override local autonomous development choices.

Jozef Sikela, European Commissioner for International Partnerships, said the EU aims to boost investment in the Arctic across transport, digital technologies, critical raw materials and scientific research through its Global Gateway initiative, ensuring every project delivers benefits to Arctic communities.

Canadian Foreign Minister Anand also observed that the Arctic boasts enormous potential in critical minerals, energy and transport, yet the crux lies in ensuring “local populations reap the benefits”.

Division over Environmental Protection: How to Tackle Climate Change

Trump has long dismissed global warming as a “hoax”, and announced U.S. withdrawal from the Paris Agreement on climate change in both of his presidential terms. Addressing climate change has become one of the most contentious issues dividing the United States and its allies.

At this assembly, European countries ranked climate action and environmental governance high on the agenda for Arctic affairs, focusing on rising temperatures, thawing permafrost and marine conservation. When asked whether climate change or military threats were of greater concern, Egede picked climate change, saying it is “transforming the way local people live”.

Canadian Foreign Minister Anand stated that shrinking sea ice and thawing permafrost are disrupting Arctic ecosystems, food security and residents’ livelihoods. Climate governance should stand alongside military security and economic development as one of the “three core Arctic issues”. Commissioner Sikela made clear that climate action remains the cornerstone of the EU’s Arctic strategy, and all EU Arctic-related initiatives must incorporate environmental protection considerations.

In comparison, the United States focuses more on resource exploitation and commercial navigation interests, attaching markedly less weight to climate issues. On the sidelines of the conference, Governor Dunleavy conceded that his communications with the White House mostly centred on energy, defence and infrastructure, with climate issues receiving “relatively little attention”.

Zhao Long pointed out that America’s renewed withdrawal from the Paris Agreement after Trump returned to the White House in 2025 deepened climate-policy rifts with its allies. The U.S. administration’s downgrading of climate cooperation will continuously disrupt Arctic multilateral governance and scientific research cooperation built around climate agendas.

Source: Shanghai Securities News