Arctic Operations: We Really, Really Need the Right Equipment and an Arctic Port

The U.S. Chief of Naval Operations has a nice tweet regarding the "Arctic region" here.

However, as noted in the March 2020 Seapower here:

Unlike the South China Sea and other contested areas, the U.S. Navy does not have the capability to conduct freedom-of-the-seas operations in the icebound waters of the Arctic, a key Pentagon official conceded.

With only one heavy and one medium icebreaker and no Navy ships with hulls hardened against ice, “We do have limitations in the Arctic right now,” James H. Anderson, assistant secretary of defense for strategy, plans and capabilities, told a readiness subcommittee of the Senate Armed Services Committee on March 3 during a hearing on U.S. military readiness in the Arctic.

***

In addition to a deficit of ice-hardened hulls, Sullivan said the U.S. lacks a strategic port on — or even near — the Arctic Ocean that could handle repairs or refueling of large Navy or even U.S. Coast Guard vessels.

“Russia has close to a dozen or two dozen ports,” he said, noting the closest viable port at Anchorage or Dutch Harbor, Alaska, was 1,000 nautical miles or more from Arctic waters. In addition to ports and military bases, Russian President Vladimir Putin has 54 icebreakers, Sullivan said. “He’s got all the cards.”

The dearth of ice capable ships is not this CNO's fault, but goes back years and years.

For example, here are a couple of posts I put up in 2007 and 2008, reproduced in their entirety:

From 2007

Reported here. Assuming that the ice caps are melting away and there is an ice free passage across the North Pole, then...

When the commander of the U.S. Coast Guard thinks of future trouble spots, his focus is increasingly to the north — the vast waters around a melting polar ice cap.

Once almost totally inaccessible to shipping and oil drilling, the region poses new opportunities for economic activity, as well as new challenges for those who patrol its frigid seas.

"If you go into a life raft 20 miles off the coast of North Carolina, chances are you are going to see the Coast Guard in a few hours," Adm. Thad Allen says. "If you go into life rafts at the edge of the Arctic ice cap, there are questions about when you should expect help to arrive."

The Arctic is still relatively empty but stands to become more crowded in coming years as several countries stake their claim to its rich oil and gas reserves. The increased maritime traffic has made the Arctic a more significant focus for the Coast Guard in the past six months, Allen says.

"We're like the cop on the beat up there," he says. That beat is massive — about half of the USA's 90,000 total miles of coastline is in Alaska.

***

Ice in the Arctic sea has decreased by nearly 20% over the past two decades, and "it would not be beyond the realm of possibility to have an ice-free route across the top of Russia sometime in the next five or 10 years," Allen says.

Such a route would shave up to 5,000 miles — a week's sailing time — off the journey between the North Atlantic and the North Pacific, he says, attracting ships that otherwise would have transited the Panama or Suez canals. Allen says there has also been heavier traffic in the Bering Sea between Alaska and Russia. He says it could become an international waterway similar to the English Channel or the Straits of Malacca between Malaysia and Indonesia.

The reduction in ice sparks competing claims among the eight nations that border the Arctic: the United States, Russia, Canada, Iceland, Norway, Sweden, Finland and Denmark (which controls Greenland).

Russia claims 460,000 square miles of the Arctic as an extension of its continental shelf under a 1982 treaty that set guidelines for dividing undersea resources.

See earlier post on the on-going land grab effort here.

From 2008

From the Heritage Foundation The New Cold War: Reviving the U.S. Presence in the Arctic:

As an Arctic nation, the United States has signif­icant geopolitical and geo-economic interests in the High North. The U.S. should not only have a place at the table, but also seek a leadership role in navi­gating the nascent challenges and opportunities, such as disputes over the Outer Continental Shelf, the navigation of Arctic sea-lanes, and commercial development of natural resources and fisheries.

To play this role and to vindicate its interests, the U.S. needs to continue swiftly mapping the Arctic, build a modern U.S. icebreaker fleet, and work with its Arctic partners in bilateral and multilateral ven­ues. The U.S. needs to revitalize its Arctic policy and commit the necessary resources to sustain America's leadership role in the High North.

Read the whole thing. Check earlier posts on this topic by clicking on labels below, especially "arctic", "polar sea routes."

Fault finding will get us nowhere, the need is to look to our allies who operate in these waters and see if, among the hull types we need they have some ice-hardened ships whose designs we can obtain. Now.

About Time - President Wants More U.S. Ice Breakers for Arctic

Source - Note the Arctic Ocean in the upper right

Silly headline in the NYTimes, "Obama to Call for More Icebreakers in Arctic as U.S. Seeks Foothold. "

Golly, I always though the Great State of Alaska (that's a map of it above) was our foothold in the Arctic since it has 1000 miles of coastline on the Arctic Ocean, but perhaps the fact that Alaska has been a state bordering the Arctic since 3 January 1959 (that's 56 years!) somehow eluded the NYT headline writer. In any event, from the article:

President Obama on Tuesday proposed speeding the acquisition and building of new Coast Guard icebreakers that can operate year round in the nation’s polar regions, part of an effort to close the gap between the United States and other nations, especially Russia, in a global competition to gain a foothold in the rapidly changing Arctic.

"Proposed?" Given his penchant for executive orders and as the Commander-in-Chief, one would think he would just order them built or bought as soon as possible.

You might note that I've been discussing the need for new U.S. ice breakers since 2008. See also last year's Arctic Waters: U.S. Policy and the Sea Services in which I embedded:

U.S. National Arctic Strategy

Other Arctic Strategies are also set out at the link.

At least the President is proposing to do something. That's a step forward.

Arctic Sea Routes: DARPA seeks monitoring systems

NOAA photo

As ice levels thin at the northernmost latitudes, the concern of how to keep an eye on the flow of sea traffic in the area grows. There are plans being floated to monitor the area for several reasons, including maritime security, as reported by Information Week as DARPA Pursues Security As Polar Ice Caps Melt:

The Department of Defense (DOD) is exploring new sensor technology to remotely monitor the Arctic region in anticipation of more shipping activity in the area as polar ice caps continue to melt.

Through the Assured Arctic Awareness (AAA) program, the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) is looking into environmentally-friendly ways to monitor the Arctic region both above and below the ice without the need for more expensive means of monitoring--such as aircraft, satellites, or manned ships and submarines--of the largely remote region, according to the agency.

DARPA's press release states:

The Arctic region is poised for greater regional significance as polar ice retreats in coming decades. Ship traffic likely will increase during summer months, and commercial activity focused on the sea floor is expected to grow. The Arctic is largely isolated, vast and environmentally extreme. Remote sensing may offer affordable advantages over traditional methods of monitoring the region—aircraft, satellites or manned ships and submarines—due to the great distances in the Arctic.
***

DARPA seeks proposals that specifically take the perceived negatives of the harsh polar environment and turn them into positives for a suite of unique Arctic capabilities.

“We’re looking for creative ideas for compelling component technologies and a vision for applying them to monitor the region—whether proposers have expertise in the Arctic or not,” said Andy Coon, DARPA program manager.

Probably not what DARPA wants - the two boy kayak observation team.

For example, those with experience in unattended ground or maritime sensors, low-temperature electronics, distributed remote sensing technologies, or autonomous operations could contribute to the development of novel technology solutions applicable to the Arctic. DARPA seeks input from these and other technical communities to develop components that address system attributes such as design, mobility and deployment, persistence, survivability, energy management, sensing, and long-haul communications back to the United States. Tests of component proposals will occur, for the most part, in climatic laboratories to assess how well they handle simulated Arctic conditions before taking them to the Arctic for field trial.

“We seek to increase the diversity of contributors, including environmental research organizations, academia, traditional defense contractors and others,” said John Kamp, DARPA deputy program manager.

The program does not seek warm latitude solutions to be applied to the Arctic, nor does it seek new platforms for access.

“The goal is to identify one or two compelling system concepts enabled by new technologies and insights gained from the effort,” Coon said. “Compelling system concepts are those that enhance future maritime security in a cost-effective and responsible manner.”

Detail on how to apply at the DARPA link above.

Maritime Security: Arctic Unpreparedness

The U. S. Coast Guard Commandant points out a problem with our ability to operate in the Arctic, where vast new resources may lie as noted in Admiral Papp: USCG Not Ready for Arctic:

“Operations in the Arctic’s extreme cold, darkness and ice-infested waters require specialized equipment, infrastructure and training. Our current Arctic capabilities are very limited. We have only one operational ice breaker. We do not have any coastal or shoreside infrastructure. Nor do we have a seasonal base to hanger our aircraft or sustain our crews.”

Refreshing honesty. If the U.S. Navy had a rep there, he or she would have had to echo and add to Admiral Papp's comments because the Navy lacks even a single ice breaker . . .

This has been looked at before on this site. See The Northeast Passage -Shorter, Faster, Avoids Somali Pirates and Adds to Maritime Security Concerns and Land rush under the ice and the links therein.

You may note that the U.S., Canada, Denmark, Norway and Russia all border the Arctic Ocean.

Full text of Admiral Papp's comments:
Papp

In a perfect world, everyone would play nice in the Arctic and there would never be any accidents or other events that the Coast Guard should respond to. However, . . .

The Northeast Passage -Shorter, Faster, Avoids Somali Pirates and Adds to Maritime Security Concerns

Interesting look at an effect of global warming that may put a dent in piracy off Somalia found at "Bye pirates, hello Northeast Passage" :

Climate change may have delivered a solution to the risk faced by ships and crew passing through the waters of Gulf of Aden. A cargo ship bearing Hong Kong flag carrying 41,000 tons of iron ore will become part of maritime history as it sails from Norway to China through Russia's arctic passage instead of the pirate-infested Somalian waters.

Although Nordic Barents is not the first ship to pass through the Arctic wasteland, it becomes the first foreign-registered vessel allowed by Russia to make a voyage between two non-Russian ports. The ship's owner aims to prove that the route would become a viable alternative to the longer southern route from Europe to Asia. Nordic Barents is scheduled to leave the small Norwegian port of Kirkenes and head towards the Chinese port of Dalian. If the trip proves successful, the route enters one more step in competing against the Suez Canal sea route.

Yep, during the appropriate seasons -

A report of the first modern commercial voyage from the Barents Observer "Route through Northeast Passage faster than expected":

The first high-tonnage tanker to take the Northern Sea Route from Europe to Asia has arrived Pevek on the Chukotka Peninsula one day earlier than expected.

It took the 100 000 tons tanker “Baltica” 11 days to cover 2500 miles. The vessel is expected to arrive in Ningbo, China, in the first half of September, web site Portnews.ru reports.
***
The fact that the tanker has covered the distance in less time than expected, shows the potential of the Northern Sea Route when it comes to cutting back on transport time and increasing cost efficiency of oil and gas deliveries to Asia and regions in the Pacific Ocean, the ship owner Sovcomflot says.

See also here.

Not without risk, though, as The Old Salt Blog reports on a collision between two Russian ships on the route.

Naturally, this new route poses a lot of concerns, both environmental and, for the U.S., national security:

Arctic melting is leaving new coastline and waterways up to the north, but some Arctic strategy experts are concerned that polar ice is melting faster than U.S. military planners are gearing up for what an open-water arctic will mean for U.S. security.
***“If you think strategy relates somehow to means and investment in means then we don’t have a strategy,” said Robert Laird, a security consultant based in Washington and Paris. “You have five stakeholders in the Arctic,” he said. The U.S., Russia, Denmark, Norway and Canada each have Arctic territory. “The only country that’s not strategic in this is us.”

It's not like the U.S. Coast Guard has been silent on the ramifications of this situation- here are a couple of links to DoD Live Blogger Roundtables in which former Commandant Adm. Thad Allen discussed the situation: Part 1 and Part 2.

The U.S. has three (yes, only 3) ice breakers suitable for operating in the Arctic environment and two of those are over 30 years old.

There is a NATIONAL SECURITY PRESIDENTIAL DIRECTIVE/NSPD -- 66 on "Arctic Region Policy":

National Security and Homeland Security Interests in the Arctic

1. The United States has broad and fundamental national security interests in the Arctic region and is prepared to operate either independently or in conjunction with other states to safeguard these interests. These interests include such matters as missile defense and early warning; deployment of sea and air systems for strategic sealift, strategic deterrence, maritime presence, and maritime security operations; and ensuring freedom of navigation and overflight.
2.The United States also has fundamental homeland security interests in preventing terrorist attacks and mitigating those criminal or hostile acts that could increase the United States vulnerability to terrorism in the Arctic region.
3.The Arctic region is primarily a maritime domain; as such, existing policies and authorities relating to maritime areas continue to apply, including those relating to law enforcement.[1] Human activity in the Arctic region is increasing and is projected to increase further in coming years. This requires the United States to assert a more active and influential national presence to protect its Arctic interests and to project sea power throughout the region.
4.The United States exercises authority in accordance with lawful claims of United States sovereignty, sovereign rights, and jurisdiction in the Arctic region, including sovereignty within the territorial sea, sovereign rights and jurisdiction within the United States exclusive economic zone and on the continental shelf, and appropriate control in the United States contiguous zone.
5. Freedom of the seas is a top national priority. The Northwest Passage is a strait used for international navigation, and the Northern Sea Route includes straits used for international navigation; the regime of transit passage applies to passage through those straits. Preserving the rights and duties relating to navigation and overflight in the Arctic region supports our ability to exercise these rights throughout the world, including through strategic straits.

The Spring 2010 issue of the Naval War College Review contains an article by Rear Admiral David W. Titley, U.S. Navy, and Courtney C. St. John, "Arctic Security Considerations and the U.S. Navy's Roadmap for the Arctic":

The Navy understands the wide range of security considerations in the Arctic region and that the effects of climate change in the Arctic will influence the geostrategic landscape.
***
While the Navy has a rich history in the Arctic, several challenges must be met
to ensure successful operations in the future. These include the lack of support
infrastructure and logistics support, environmental hazards such as drifting sea
ice and icing on exposed surfaces, and communications difficulties. Antiquated
nautical charts, drifting ice, low visibility, and the paucity of electronic and visual navigation aids hinder safety of navigation. A lack of coastal installations
also contributes to the difficulty of search and rescue (SAR) operations. The only American-owned deepwater port near the Arctic basin is Dutch Harbor, in the Aleutian Islands.

More on the Arctic Roadmap here. And a USNI article Arctic Melt: Reopening a Naval Frontier. Of course, the topic was raised in the Sea Services' A Cooperative Strategy for 21st Century Seapower:

Climate change is gradually opening up the waters of the Arctic, not only to new resource development, but also to new shipping routes that may reshape the global transport system. While these developments offer opportunities for growth, they are potential sources of competition and conflict for access and natural resources.

Previous USNI Blog posts that are related: CHINA: Linking the South China Sea and the Arctic Ocean and Arctic Diplomatic Meet Gets Frosty.

UPDATE: China's Arctic claim "or claim jumping?"

I guess it's time to get busy. Where's the funding?

Earlier post on Russia's Arctic Sea ambitions here.

More on this later.
UPDATE: Northern Passage vs. Suez Passage:

Outgoing President Issues Arctic Policy Directive

The National and Homeland Security Directive pertaining to the Arctic can be found here:

III. POLICY

A. It is the policy of the United States to:

1. Meet national security and homeland security needs relevant to the Arctic region;
2. Protect the Arctic environment and conserve its biological resources;
3. Ensure that natural resource management and economic development in the region are environmentally sustainable;
4. Strengthen institutions for cooperation among the eight Arctic nations (the United States, Canada, Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, the Russian Federation, and Sweden);
5. Involve the Arctic's indigenous communities in decisions that affect them; and
6. Enhance scientific monitoring and research into local, regional, and global environmental issues.

B. National Security and Homeland Security Interests in the Arctic

1. The United States has broad and fundamental national security interests in the Arctic region and is prepared to operate either independently or in conjunction with other states to safeguard these interests. These interests include such matters as missile defense and early warning; deployment of sea and air systems for strategic sealift, strategic deterrence, maritime presence, and maritime security operations; and ensuring freedom of navigation and overflight.
2. The United States also has fundamental homeland security interests in preventing terrorist attacks and mitigating those criminal or hostile acts that could increase the United States vulnerability to terrorism in the Arctic region.
3. The Arctic region is primarily a maritime domain; as such, existing policies and authorities relating to maritime areas continue to apply, including those relating to law enforcement.[1] Human activity in the Arctic region is increasing and is projected to increase further in coming years. This requires the United States to assert a more active and influential national presence to protect its Arctic interests and to project sea power throughout the region.
4. The United States exercises authority in accordance with lawful claims of United States sovereignty, sovereign rights, and jurisdiction in the Arctic region, including sovereignty within the territorial sea, sovereign rights and jurisdiction within the United States exclusive economic zone and on the continental shelf, and appropriate control in the United States contiguous zone.
5. Freedom of the seas is a top national priority. The Northwest Passage is a strait used for international navigation, and the Northern Sea Route includes straits used for international navigation; the regime of transit passage applies to passage through those straits. Preserving the rights and duties relating to navigation and overflight in the Arctic region supports our ability to exercise these rights throughout the world, including through strategic straits.
6. Implementation: In carrying out this policy as it relates to national security and homeland security interests in the Arctic, the Secretaries of State, Defense, and Homeland Security, in coordination with heads of other relevant executive departments and agencies, shall:
1. Develop greater capabilities and capacity, as necessary, to protect United States air, land, and sea borders in the Arctic region;
2. Increase Arctic maritime domain awareness in order to protect maritime commerce, critical infrastructure, and key resources;
3. Preserve the global mobility of United States military and civilian vessels and aircraft throughout the Arctic region;
4. Project a sovereign United States maritime presence in the Arctic in support of essential United States interests; and
5. Encourage the peaceful resolution of disputes in the Arctic region.
***
D. Extended Continental Shelf and Boundary Issues

1. Defining with certainty the area of the Arctic seabed and subsoil in which the United States may exercise its sovereign rights over natural resources such as oil, natural gas, methane hydrates, minerals, and living marine species is critical to our national interests in energy security, resource management, and environmental protection. The most effective way to achieve international recognition and legal certainty for our extended continental shelf is through the procedure available to States Parties to the U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea.
2. The United States and Canada have an unresolved boundary in the Beaufort Sea. United States policy recognizes a boundary in this area based on equidistance. The United States recognizes that the boundary area may contain oil, natural gas, and other resources.
3. The United States and Russia are abiding by the terms of a maritime boundary treaty concluded in 1990, pending its entry into force. The United States is prepared to enter the agreement into force once ratified by the Russian Federation.

UPDATE: More news from Government Executive:

In her confirmation hearing Tuesday, Secretary of State designate Hillary Clinton said, "I believe that the issues of the Arctic are one of those long-term matters that will dramatically affect our commercial, our environmental, and our energy futures," according to an account by KTUU television, the CBS affiliate in Anchorage.

Clinton told Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, that resolving boundary disputes with other nations was critical. "We've got to figure out where our boundaries are if people start drilling in areas that are ice-free most of the year, and we don't know where they can and can't drill, and whether we can," Clinton said, according to the KTUU account.

The implications of the new policy are especially great for the Coast Guard, which is responsible for safeguarding U.S. waters. In an interview at the National Press Club early last year, Coast Guard Commandant Thad Allen declined to discuss his views about climate change, but said, "All I know is there's water where it didn't use to be, and it's my responsibility to deal with that."

The Coast Guard's aging fleet of icebreaking ships has long been a concern for the service. It has two 30-year-old icebreakers, one of which has been out of service for most of the last year. It also has one ship devoted to scientific research that has some ice-breaking capability.

Arctic Turf War

From the Heritage Foundation The New Cold War: Reviving the U.S. Presence in the Arctic:

As an Arctic nation, the United States has signif­icant geopolitical and geo-economic interests in the High North. The U.S. should not only have a place at the table, but also seek a leadership role in navi­gating the nascent challenges and opportunities, such as disputes over the Outer Continental Shelf, the navigation of Arctic sea-lanes, and commercial development of natural resources and fisheries.

To play this role and to vindicate its interests, the U.S. needs to continue swiftly mapping the Arctic, build a modern U.S. icebreaker fleet, and work with its Arctic partners in bilateral and multilateral ven­ues. The U.S. needs to revitalize its Arctic policy and commit the necessary resources to sustain America's leadership role in the High North.

Read the whole thing. Check earlier posts on this topic by clicking on labels below, especially "arctic", "polar sea routes."

Coasties Need Modern Icebreakers for "New" Arctic Realities

The U.S. Coast Guard has two big, new polar ice breakers. Well, they were new about 30 years ago... and the new realities of the push into the newly accessible, potentially rich Arctic (see here) has the Coasties pointing out they need new ice breakers now!

The National Academy of Sciences, the Coast Guard and others have warned over the past several years that the United States’ two 30-year-old heavy icebreakers, the Polar Sea and Polar Star, and one smaller ice-breaking ship devoted mainly to science, the Healy, are grossly inadequate. Also, the Polar Star is out of service.
***
Adm. Thad W. Allen, the commandant of the Coast Guard, who toured Alaska’s Arctic shores two weeks ago with the homeland security secretary, Michael Chertoff, said that whatever mix of natural and human factors is causing the ice retreats, the Arctic is clearly opening to commerce — and potential conflict and hazards — like never before.

“All I know is, there is water where it didn’t used to be, and I’m responsible for dealing with that,” Admiral Allen said in a recent interview. Given the 8 or 10 years it would take to build even one icebreaker, he added, “I think we’re at a crisis point on making a decision.”

Ice breakers ain't cheap and need a long lead time, as some of us who were around when the current ships were built recall.

Time to get a move on - Congress needs to put money into the Coast Guard, and the Coast Guard needs to spend it smartly.

Increasing Coast Guard Arctic Flights

An increase in Coast Guard Arctic flights might not be a big story but check out the little gem in the middle of this piece:

The U.S. Coast Guard says it's stepped up surveillance flights to the Arctic.

It plans to complete one every two weeks to familiarize crews with the terrain.

A flight last week, called the Arctic Domain Awareness, also provided training for crew on the C-130 cargo plane.

Rear Adm. Gene Brooks, commander of the 17th Coast Guard District, said the Guard needs to know about the lay of the land and what other nations might be doing in the Arctic.

During one of the flights, which began last fall, Brooks said the Coast Guard was surprised to come upon Chinese research vessels.

Yeah, I'd keep an eye out for that...wonder what oil field they were researching? And what else they were looking into...