Major Political Challenges#

The Arctic Council is the most important forum for Arctic cooperation between the eight Arctic states. The region was long characterized by low tension and peaceful coexistence. But in 2022, seven of the member states paused work in the Council, as a protest against Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Under Norway’s leadership, cooperation was gradually resumed in the professional working groups, which kept the Council alive, albeit at a low level. At the same time, there is a constant risk that Russia will withdraw, thereby tearing the rug from the entire cooperation.

In addition, there is uncertainty about how the United States will act in the Arctic Council under a possible new Trump administration. The last time he was president, the ministerial meeting in the Arctic Council ended for the first time without a joint final statement. The reason was then-U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo’s opposition to formulations about climate change. Trump’s relationship with indigenous peoples has also been strained, including when he wanted to give Mount Denali in Alaska its former name of Mount McKinley back.

Greenland is the Reason Why Denmark has a Seat#

Greenland is the reason why Denmark has a seat at the table in the Arctic Council at all. Nevertheless, Denmark has until now had the main role on behalf of the entire kingdom. It is no longer as self-evident.

With the Greenlandic Self-Government Act of 2009, Greenland was transferred responsibility for several policy areas, including many of those dealt with in the Arctic Council. The law opens up for independence if the Greenlandic people so desire. Increased national self-confidence, combined with the upcoming “Danish” chairmanship, has meant that Greenland is now demanding a clearer role in the Council, not only as a participant, but as a leader.

This came as a surprise to the authorities in Copenhagen. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs wanted to follow the old recipe and appoint a Danish career diplomat as Arctic ambassador. The reaction from the Greenlandic members of the Folketing was not long in coming, Aaja Chemnitz called it “colonialist mentality”, Aki-Matilda Høegh-Dam called it “ridiculous”.

The Greenlandic National Government refused to accept the appointment. They demanded that the ambassador be appointed by Greenland, and that no new Arctic strategy for the Kingdom of Denmark be launched before Greenland had adopted its own.

Denmark in reality had no answer to these demands. A “Danish” chairmanship without Greenlandic support would lack legitimacy, both internally and externally.

A New Balance Within the Kingdom#

The solution was an agreement: Greenland’s Foreign Minister will lead the Arctic Council politically on behalf of the kingdom, and Greenland appoints the Arctic ambassador. The ambassador will also become the head of the group of senior officials in the Council (Senior Arctic Officials, SAO).

These negotiations took place before Trump in 2019 made his famous wish that the United States should buy Greenland, a statement that was roundly rejected in both Denmark and Greenland. This helped to strengthen the ties between the two, while also giving new strength to Greenlandic self-esteem. Greenland will now lead the Arctic Council, while the United States, the superpower that wanted to buy them, will sit as an ordinary member.

It has also been agreed that the Arctic ambassador will have offices in both Nuuk and Copenhagen. This marks that the leadership is a joint project, not a solo performance for Greenland.

This could give the Arctic indigenous peoples greater influence in the future, across national borders.

A New Type of Leadership#

Norway’s leadership has shown that the Arctic Council today faces different challenges than before. The Council’s core tasks, such as the environment, climate, oceans and sustainable development, are still central. But now these tasks must be handled in parallel with a complex geopolitical and security policy backdrop. Solidarity with Ukraine and a clear distance from Russia’s special military operation must be weighed against the risk of Russia withdrawing completely, thereby making the Council irrelevant.

Indigenous Peoples and Arctic Communities at the Centre#

The Kingdom of Denmark’s chairmanship programme is close to the Norwegian one. Here too, sustainable economic development, the ocean, climate and biodiversity are central. But an important difference is that where Norway emphasized “the northern peoples”, Denmark has given the highest priority to “indigenous peoples and Arctic communities”, integrated into all the themes.

The ambition is to bring the Council’s work closer to the people of the Arctic, and to combine traditional knowledge from indigenous peoples with modern research. In this way, it also wants to strengthen what is a unique feature of the Arctic Council, the six indigenous peoples’ organisations that have a permanent seat at the table, side by side with the states.

Since the ministerial meetings are still on ice, this could give the Arctic indigenous peoples greater influence in the future, across national borders. Greenland, where around 90 per cent of the population is considered indigenous, is well positioned to promote this agenda.

Another powerhouse in the Council are the professional working groups. They were revived under Norwegian leadership after a period of dormancy. These groups deliver the Council’s most important outputs, including scientific reports, environmental monitoring, technical recommendations and guidelines for the Arctic states.

Now it is up to Greenland, with Denmark and the Faroe Islands at its back, to continue this work. In a time of uncertainty, the Arctic Council can still be a stable Arctic platform.

Source: Altinget.no (in Norwegian)