- Published
- By Dr. Kelsey A. Frazier
Abstract
This article examines the multifaceted implications of changing environmental conditions in the Arctic, particularly for US national security. It highlights both the challenges and opportunities these transformations present. As diminishing sea ice, altered wave dynamics, increased wind speeds, and emerging weather phenomena such as rogue waves and intensified lightning reshape the Arctic landscape, the need for adaptive strategies, enhanced surveillance, and robust infrastructure resilience becomes paramount. The analysis underscores the importance of leveraging technological advancements and fostering international collaboration to navigate the operational risks and strategic complexities resulting from the Arctic’s evolving climate. It also explores the economic potentials unlocked by new maritime routes and the access to untapped natural resources, advocating for sustainable and cooperative approaches to regional development and security. Through a comprehensive examination of the dynamic Arctic environment, this article emphasizes the United States’ pivotal role in promoting security, stability, and prosperity in the region, advocating for a proactive, informed, and collaborative approach to ensure a resilient, sustainable, and beneficial future for the Arctic and its stakeholders.
***
The acquisition of Alaska from Russia in 1867 positioned the United States as a key player in the Arctic region, making it one of eight Arctic nations and one of five with coastlines along the Arctic Ocean. However, it was not until the 1970s that the United States began to formalize its Arctic strategy within national policy, initiated by President Richard Nixon’s National Security Decision Memorandum 144. This seminal document highlighted the Arctic's strategic, economic, scientific, and environmental significance, stressing the need to enhance US capabilities for operations and understanding in the region.[1]
Over the ensuing five decades, the United States has engaged in extensive research to deepen the understanding of the Arctic, leveraging partnerships among federal and state agencies, academia, and the private sector. This collective endeavor has yielded notable advancements, spanning from construction guidelines for permafrost regions to sophisticated Arctic equipment and improved weather prediction models. Despite these achievements, our current knowledge does not fully equip us to predict the Arctic’s future conditions accurately, a situation with significant homeland defense implications. Absent improvements to forecasting capabilities, the homeland defense ramifications loom large.
Arctic temperatures are rising at a rate four times faster than the global average, precipitating significant ecological transformations and challenging existing knowledge. This warming is uneven across regions, with areas like Northern Russia experiencing particularly rapid temperature increases, while others, like Northern Canada and Greenland, witness more gradual warming. These climate changes exert profound effects on construction, food sources, and the potential exploitation of the region's resources.
The article aims to explore prospective climate scenarios in the Arctic and their strategic implications, particularly for US security interests. Drawing upon the latest academic research from leading institutions in North America and Europe, it analyzes historical data to forecast potential trends. This analysis aims to elucidate the implications of climatic shifts for inhabitants and operators in the Arctic, providing guidance for preparing for forthcoming challenges.
Strategic Context
Sea Ice
In the contemporary Arctic, the well-documented retreat of sea ice is characterized by the dominance of first-year ice, with multiyear ice observed in limited regions. This transformation sets the stage for a fundamental shift in the Arctic’s ice dynamics, particularly within the Arctic sea marginal ice zone (MIZ). Historically, the MIZ constituted a relatively modest portion, accounting for approximately 14–20 percent of the overall Arctic ice cover (fig. 1).
Photo Details / Download Hi-Res 
' + '
SHOW PHOTO DETAILS
'; } else { caption += $(this).find('figcaption').html() + getDetailsURL($(this).parent()) + getDownloadURL($(this).parent()) + showFBShare(); } } return caption; }, afterLoad: function (instance, current) { //initial desktop view $(".fancybox-caption__body").addClass("a2a_kit").addClass("a2a_default_style"); if (isMobile()) $(".fancybox-caption__body").addClass("mobile"); }, afterShow: function (instance, current) { var $currentSlide = $(".fancybox-slide.fancybox-slide--current.fancybox-slide--image").parent().parent(); if (isMobile()) $currentSlide.find(".fancy-detail-link").on("touchstart", function() { captionToggle(); }); }, afterClose: function () { } })); let debounceTimer; $(window).on("resize", function (event) { if (isMobile()) return; if ($(".af3-caption-body").length > 0 && $(".af3-caption-body").css("height") != undefined) { event.stopImmediatePropagation(); $(".fancybox-caption__body").removeClass("half"); isDesktopInit = false; captionToggle(); debounceTimer = setTimeout(function () { clearTimeout(debounceTimer); debounceTimer = null; recalculateImageSize(); }, 1000); } }); function recalculateImageSize() { // Fancy box miscalculates because of race conditions with new layout var origImgWth = $(".fancybox-image").prop("naturalWidth"); var origImgHgt = $(".fancybox-image").prop("naturalHeight"); var winWth = $(window).innerWidth(); var winHgt = $(window).innerHeight() var ratio = Math.min(winWth / origImgWth, winHgt / origImgHgt); var newImgWth = (origImgWth * ratio); var newImgHgt = (origImgHgt * ratio); var dstTop = Math.floor((winHgt - newImgHgt)) / 2; var dstLeft = Math.floor((winWth - newImgWth)) / 2; $(".fancybox-content").removeAttr("style"); $(".fancybox-content").css("width", newImgWth + "px"); $(".fancybox-content").css("height", newImgHgt + "px"); $(".fancybox-content").css("transform", "translate(" + dstLeft + "px, " + dstTop + "px)"); } function captionToggle() { if ($(".fancybox-caption__body").hasClass("af3-caption-body")) { $(".af3-caption-body").stop(true, false).animate({ height: "0vh" }, 800, function () { // Animation complete. closeDetails(); }); $(".fancy-photo-detail-link").html($(".fancy-photo-detail-link").html().replace("CLOSE", "SHOW")); } else { $(".fancybox-caption__body").addClass("af3-caption-body"); $(".af3-caption-body").addClass(detailSize); $(".af3-caption-body").animate({ height: displayhgt }, 800); $(".fancybox-caption").addClass("af3-caption-bg"); $(".base-caption-info").addClass("full-height"); $(".fancy-photo-detail-link").addClass("photo-detail-gradient"); $(".fancybox-button").css("display", "none"); $(".fancy-photo-detail-link").html($(".fancy-photo-detail-link").html().replace("SHOW", "CLOSE")); $(".fancybox-caption__body").prepend(prependClosing()); $(".closing-box, .closingx").on("touchstart", function() { captionToggle(); }); } } function getDetailsURL(fbObj) { return 'DETAILS'; } function getDownloadURL(fbObj) { return 'DOWNLOAD'; } function showFBShare() { return ''; } function closeDetails() { $(".af3-caption-body").removeClass(detailSize); $(".fancybox-caption__body").removeClass("af3-caption-body"); $(".fancybox-caption").removeClass("af3-caption-bg"); $(".base-caption-info").removeClass("full-height"); $(".fancy-photo-detail-link").removeClass("photo-detail-gradient"); $(".fancybox-button").css("display", "block"); if (detailSize === "half") { detailSize = "full"; displayhgt = "90vh"; $(".fancybox-caption").removeClass("desktop-init"); } } function prependClosing() { return '
' } function isMobile() { var isMobile = false; //initiate as false // device detection if (/(android|bb\d+|meego).+mobile|avantgo|bada\/|blackberry|blazer|compal|elaine|fennec|hiptop|iemobile|ip(hone|od)|ipad|iris|kindle|Android|Silk|lge |maemo|midp|mmp|netfront|opera m(ob|in)i|palm( os)?|phone|p(ixi|re)\/|plucker|pocket|psp|series(4|6)0|symbian|treo|up\.(browser|link)|vodafone|wap|windows (ce|phone)|xda|xiino/i.test(navigator.userAgent) || /1207|6310|6590|3gso|4thp|50[1-6]i|770s|802s|a wa|abac|ac(er|oo|s\-)|ai(ko|rn)|al(av|ca|co)|amoi|an(ex|ny|yw)|aptu|ar(ch|go)|as(te|us)|attw|au(di|\-m|r |s )|avan|be(ck|ll|nq)|bi(lb|rd)|bl(ac|az)|br(e|v)w|bumb|bw\-(n|u)|c55\/|capi|ccwa|cdm\-|cell|chtm|cldc|cmd\-|co(mp|nd)|craw|da(it|ll|ng)|dbte|dc\-s|devi|dica|dmob|do(c|p)o|ds(12|\-d)|el(49|ai)|em(l2|ul)|er(ic|k0)|esl8|ez([4-7]0|os|wa|ze)|fetc|fly(\-|_)|g1 u|g560|gene|gf\-5|g\-mo|go(\.w|od)|gr(ad|un)|haie|hcit|hd\-(m|p|t)|hei\-|hi(pt|ta)|hp( i|ip)|hs\-c|ht(c(\-| |_|a|g|p|s|t)|tp)|hu(aw|tc)|i\-(20|go|ma)|i230|iac( |\-|\/)|ibro|idea|ig01|ikom|im1k|inno|ipaq|iris|ja(t|v)a|jbro|jemu|jigs|kddi|keji|kgt( |\/)|klon|kpt |kwc\-|kyo(c|k)|le(no|xi)|lg( g|\/(k|l|u)|50|54|\-[a-w])|libw|lynx|m1\-w|m3ga|m50\/|ma(te|ui|xo)|mc(01|21|ca)|m\-cr|me(rc|ri)|mi(o8|oa|ts)|mmef|mo(01|02|bi|de|do|t(\-| |o|v)|zz)|mt(50|p1|v )|mwbp|mywa|n10[0-2]|n20[2-3]|n30(0|2)|n50(0|2|5)|n7(0(0|1)|10)|ne((c|m)\-|on|tf|wf|wg|wt)|nok(6|i)|nzph|o2im|op(ti|wv)|oran|owg1|p800|pan(a|d|t)|pdxg|pg(13|\-([1-8]|c))|phil|pire|pl(ay|uc)|pn\-2|po(ck|rt|se)|prox|psio|pt\-g|qa\-a|qc(07|12|21|32|60|\-[2-7]|i\-)|qtek|r380|r600|raks|rim9|ro(ve|zo)|s55\/|sa(ge|ma|mm|ms|ny|va)|sc(01|h\-|oo|p\-)|sdk\/|se(c(\-|0|1)|47|mc|nd|ri)|sgh\-|shar|sie(\-|m)|sk\-0|sl(45|id)|sm(al|ar|b3|it|t5)|so(ft|ny)|sp(01|h\-|v\-|v )|sy(01|mb)|t2(18|50)|t6(00|10|18)|ta(gt|lk)|tcl\-|tdg\-|tel(i|m)|tim\-|t\-mo|to(pl|sh)|ts(70|m\-|m3|m5)|tx\-9|up(\.b|g1|si)|utst|v400|v750|veri|vi(rg|te)|vk(40|5[0-3]|\-v)|vm40|voda|vulc|vx(52|53|60|61|70|80|81|83|85|98)|w3c(\-| )|webc|whit|wi(g |nc|nw)|wmlb|wonu|x700|yas\-|your|zeto|zte\-/i.test(navigator.userAgent.substr(0, 4))) { isMobile = true; } return isMobile; } });
Figure 1. Chart of sea ice concentration produced by US National Ice Center (USNIC), 2 August 2023.[2] Yellow indicates the current marginal ice zone and red indicates pack ice. In future decades, more yellow, and less red is predicted to appear on such charts. Figure is in the public domain.
However, recent climate models indicate a significant change on the horizon. By 2040, projections suggest a substantial expansion of the MIZ, encompassing more than 90 percent of the Arctic’s sea ice.[3] This evolving MIZ landscape carries far-reaching security implications, notably the escalation in the mobility of sea ice. With a larger portion of the ice cover now falling within the MIZ, the once stable central ice pack is diminishing, ushering in a more dynamic and rapidly shifting sea ice environment. These transformations hold critical significance for Arctic operators and planners, prompting adaptations in navigation, resource utilization, and strategic planning to address the evolving conditions.
As sea ice undergoes changes, the dynamics of wave attenuation are also experiencing a discernible transformation. Ice and waves have a complex interaction. While sea ice suppresses waves by dissipating their energy, waves simultaneously break up sea ice at the leading (outermost) edge. The dominance of either ice or waves in this interplay hinges on ice thickness. Historically, when sea ice thickness surpassed a threshold of 0.5 meters or more, wave attenuation rates were observed to be twice as high.[4] Comparisons between observed wave attenuation rates and models of future conditions suggest that when wave height and period are closely matched, older and thicker ice facilitates more rapid wave attenuation.
However, with the Arctic experiencing a reduction in ice coverage and thickness across the region, a shift in attenuation rates is occurring. The diminishing and thinning ice no longer acts as an effective barrier to dampen wave energy. This development carries substantial consequences, considering the increased mobility of sea ice and the expanding Arctic MIZ. This transformation will result in amplified waves within the region, impacting shorelines by accelerating erosion and block collapse along bluff faces. These changes necessitate strategic adaptations for operators and planners navigating the evolving Arctic seascape.
Surface Waves
Wave behavior in the Arctic is undergoing a transformation in response to the diminishing sea ice cover. As the expanse of pack ice recedes and the Arctic’s sea MIZ expands, the behavior of surface waves is gaining prominence. This shift stems from the increased availability of open water, allowing for more extensive interactions between the wind and the water’s surface. Supported by empirical observations, satellite data, and wave models, this phenomenon underscores the growing fetch in the Arctic Ocean due to diminished ice coverage.[5]
In 2012, one of the earliest fall storms was documented in the central Beaufort Sea, yielding wave heights of five meters primarily due to the absence of sea ice. Utilizing this data, Jim Thomson and W. Erick Rogers generated hindcast models illustrating the impact of storms on ice-free regions of the Arctic.[6]
With a larger surface area of open water and the wind acting over greater distances, regional wave heights are on the rise. Projections from modeling efforts indicate that by 2100, significant wave heights will exhibit a two-to-three-meter increase compared to current averages across much of the Arctic Ocean.[7] This heightened surface variability increases risk for maritime surface operations, thus bearing significant homeland security implications, particularly for search-and-rescue (SAR) operations, emergency response, and general security activities. Moreover, the upsurge in wave heights, when coupled with rising sea levels, may pose additional threats to coastal communities in the region.
Another factor contributing to the increasing fetch and anticipated wave conditions in the future stems from the northward migration of polar lows (PL), which are transient weather systems that manifest over open water or in the vicinity of the MIZ when air temperatures reach a critical cold threshold. These weather phenomena are characterized by their relatively small scale, spanning from 200-km to 1,000-km in diameter, and their intense yet relatively short-lived nature, persisting for periods ranging from six hours to a few days.[8]
As the sea ice diminishes, climate models suggest a potential decline in the observed frequency of PLs at lower latitudes, partly attributed to the retreat of sea ice. However, as this transition unfolds, the significance of these atmospheric phenomena should not be underestimated. PLs have the capacity to generate substantial wave heights, often exceeding 10 meters, along with extended wave periods. The result of these evolving climatic shifts is an increased variability in surface wave heights and unpredictability in regional weather patterns. These changes add to the challenge of maritime air and surface operations given the difficulties US weather models have accurately predicting PLs.
In the context of climate change and its ramifications for both Arctic shipping and maritime patrol operations, recent simulations conducted by George Mason University reveal a noteworthy shift in wave hazards within the region. As pack ice continues its retreat and opens the Northwest Passage (NWP), their findings indicate a prospective extension of the shipping season, with a projected five-month period of reduced sea ice risk for maritime activities by the year 2070.[9]
As the reduction in ice cover permits increased shipping activity, it also extends the seasonal period during which wave hazards are present. Historically, sea ice begins to develop in late September. If models are correct, and freeze-up shifts toward November, then extreme wave heights will coincide with freezing temperatures. The combination of these factors raises concerns about the threat of rime icing on marine vessels during this extended shipping period. This emerging hazard underscores the need for adaptive strategies and heightened vigilance by Arctic mariners and airmen to safely and effectively navigate the evolving Arctic seascape.
Wind Speed
Surface winds in the Arctic are also experiencing noteworthy changes. A study conducted by Stephen J. Vavrus and Ramdane Alkama employed 28 models from 17 nations within the Collaborative Model Intercomparison Project Phase 5 (CMIP5) to predict the mean surface wind conditions in the Arctic through the year 2100. Initially, they examined a reference period of known sea ice concentrations and mean wind speeds from 2006 to 2015. Past data clearly showed an anticorrelation between sea ice concentration and surface speeds. In sum, as the extent of ice covering the ocean diminished, the wind speeds increased. Subsequently, the researchers utilized various models and numerous future scenarios to predict future changes. Their findings indicate an overall strengthening of wind speeds, within the range of 0.4 to 0.8 meters per second, and an approximate 13 percent overall increase in windiness across the entire Arctic region.[10]
Seasonally, this research indicates that the Arctic will experience its most significant winds during the winter months, accompanied by notable increases in wind strength during the fall. Regions projected to experience substantial increases include the Chukchi–East Siberian Seas, Franz Josef Land, and Hudson Bay. A particularly striking observation is the predicted peak in mean wind speeds, reflecting a 23-percent increase in the vicinity of Wrangel Island, northwest of the Bering Strait. This heightened wind activity, especially during the winter season, is expected to result in a 1.5 meters per second (m/s) increase, carrying considerable implications for communities in Siberia and Alaska.
Similar conclusions were reached by Mirseid Akperov and colleagues, albeit employing a different ensemble of climate models.[11] Looking at future periods of 2020–2049 and 2070–2099, these researchers’ findings also indicated an overall increase in wind speeds across the Arctic Ocean, with regional peaks in the Bering and Chukchi Seas and around Greenland. One curious finding was a modeled outcome showing significant decreases in wind speeds in both the Barents Sea and around Norway, despite predictions of diminished sea ice in the area.
Of importance to maritime industries are the predicted regional differences in mean wind speeds along the Northern Sea Route (NSR) and the NWP. Both routes are undergoing increased scrutiny as shipping lanes and are likely to see more traffic in the coming years due to diminished sea ice. The models indicate that the NSR is poised to experience a more gradual increase in wind conditions when compared to the NWP. This discrepancy stems from variances in sea ice depletion, characterized by accelerated ice loss along the northern coast of Russia and more gradual losses along North America, and the intricate interplay of wind patterns across diverse Arctic regions.
These findings hold profound implications for homeland security in the Arctic region. Foremost is the need for accurate and timely regional Arctic weather forecasts. With the Arctic experiencing elevated average windiness and increasing variability in conditions, the necessity for precise and localized weather predictions is paramount. Additionally, the regional changes will provide some Arctic nations with calmer coastal waters, while others will contend with seas that are more challenging to navigate. Increasing hazardous conditions will impact coastal infrastructure, settlements, and commercial interests—notably oil, gas, and critical mineral extraction. The actual impact of these conditions on regional economics and geopolitics remains to be seen.
Rogue Waves
In January 2024, a rogue wave hit the US Army Garrison–Kwajalein Atoll in the Marshall Islands.[12] Large waves are classified as rogue when the wave height is greater than twice the local significant wave height. For the Marshall Islands, the significant (severe) wave height is 2.91-m; the January rogue wave was 4.57-m.[13] Given that the surrounding area of Roi-Namur Island, where the base is situated, has an elevation of only 4 meters above sea level, the devastation wrought by the wave comes as no surprise. Yet, the term rogue may be somewhat misleading; while these wave types might be less frequent, they occur all around the world on a daily basis, including in the Arctic.
For years, rogue waves were dismissed as mere folklore until the advent of modern oceanographic technology. As recently as 1995, the scientific community largely disregarded these extreme waves. However, this perception changed with the discovery of radar data from the Goma oilfield in the North Sea provided evidence of 466 rogue waves over a 12-year period. This empirical evidence refuted the assumption that rogue waves were exceedingly rare events occurring once in every 10,000 years.[14]
In the Arctic, public sources of data on rogue waves are scarce, with most recorded instances near the Arctic originating from the North Sea. Untranslated research by Russian scientists at the Marine Hydrophysical Institute of the Russian Academy of Sciences, as summarized in English by Aleksej Kudenko, suggests that they possess relevant information; however, current geopolitical circ*mstances hinder efforts to ascertain the exact source of such data.[15] Still, the English-language article mentions that their scientists have models predicting 4-meter waves occurring at least six times a year, 8-meter waves occurring two to three times annually, and 10-meter waves occurring about once a year. Furthermore, the article mentions that 15-meter waves in the Arctic are an event occurring once a decade.
The locations where such rogue waves occur remain a subject of ongoing study. Scientists are still investigating their development and identifying areas prone to experiencing large wave events. However, the trends of reduced sea ice, heightened wave activity, and increased wind in the Arctic signal a future environment more susceptible to significant waves. Coupled with the relatively low elevation along coastal areas of the Arctic, rogue waves are likely to pose geophysical, safety, and livelihood security concerns for both terrestrial communities and future Arctic mariners.
Arctic Cyclones
The distinction between hurricanes, cyclones, and typhoons lies in their geographical naming conventions; however, all represent the same meteorological phenomenon: a rotating, organized system of clouds and thunderstorms.[16] Typically, these storms form in mid-latitudes when the temperature of ocean water in the upper 50 meters reaches at least 27°C (80°F), creating atmospheric instability from the heat exchange between the ocean and air, which fuels the convective process and storm intensification. Arctic cyclones, distinct with their “cold cores,” depend on factors such as sea ice concentration (SIC), turbulent heat flux, static stability, and vertical wind shear. Unlike equatorial hurricanes, Arctic storm intensification results from the convergence of two disparate air masses with varying temperatures.
The presence of sea ice significantly influences Arctic cyclones. Abundant sea ice restricts the turbulent heat flux between the ocean and the atmosphere, whereas minimal ice allows for unrestrained energy transfer. Recent research by Alex D. Crawford and colleagues has shown that Arctic cyclones intensify in areas with reduced sea ice, particularly during fall and winter, and are associated with increased precipitation.[17] Furthermore, the distribution of sea ice is affected, with an increase on the western edge of a cyclone and a decrease on the eastern edge due to wind rotation around the storm’s core.[18]
Coastal Arctic communities face mounting vulnerability to the impacts of these storms as sea ice cover diminishes. In September 2022, Typhoon Merbok (fig. 2) made landfall on Alaska’s western coast, unleashing storm surges and high winds. Without the sea ice that historically mitigated the impact of such storms, the region experienced substantial flooding and water damage.[19] These storms can also bring warm winds and heavy rainfall, exacerbating geophysical security concerns by hastening permafrost thaw and damaging critical infrastructure.
Photo Details / Download Hi-Res 
