A recent comment to a post prompted me to contemplate the
Arctic. is reportedly developing Arctic capabilities and the
Russia has lamented an icebreaker gap. Here’s a quote reporting on President Obama’s
call for more icebreakers. US
needs to build
heavy icebreakers if it is to catch up with US in the Russia Arctic, the White
House said. President Barack Obama called for funding the construction of the
specialized ships on the second day of his visit to .” (1) Alaska
What’s missing is a rationale for the icebreakers other than the fact that
has more than we do – a worthless rationale by
What strategic benefit do we gain by being able to operate in the
Arctic? I genuinely pose the question. I do not immediately see any benefit but I have
not studied the issue enough to have a well formed opinion.
Our submarines are already under-ice capable so there’s nothing to be gained there. There are no strategic mineral resources in the
Arctic that we cannot get easier and cheaper from somewhere
else. Russian Arctic military bases
would not threaten us any more than they are already capable of doing.
In short, I see no compelling reason to want to operate in the
Arctic. Maybe a reader can offer a
strategic interest in the Arctic?