Russia & NATO: Arctic Military Buildup Intensifies

Moscow Weighs Opportunities and Risks as U.S. Focuses on Greenland

February 11, 2026 – The intensifying geopolitical competition in the Arctic is drawing a measured response from Moscow, as the United States re-evaluates its strategic interests in Greenland. While Russian officials express concern over potential U.S. Military expansion in the region, they also see an opportunity to highlight perceived double standards in international relations and to underscore what they view as the primacy of power projection.

The recent focus on Greenland, sparked by past discussions of potential acquisition by the Trump administration, has prompted a “carefully calibrated response” from Russia, according to analysts. Public statements have been restrained, masking deeper anxieties about the implications for Russian naval operations, particularly those of its strategic submarine fleet.

“One of the most evident conclusions made here in Moscow by many politicians and analysts is that in this emerging world order, which is replacing the old one, might makes right, whether we like it or not,” said Andrey Kortunov, an expert with the Valdai Discussion Club and former director general of the Russian International Affairs Council. “It’s not about norms, but rather about your capabilities to achieve the goals you set for yourself.” Kortunov described the situation as representing “an entirely different level of realpolitik we haven’t seen arguably since the Suez crisis of 1956,” noting that the U.S. Was targeting allies rather than adversaries.

The primary Russian concern centers on potential disruptions to access for its strategic submarines operating in the Barents Sea. An enhanced U.S. Military presence in Greenland could “create certain problems for the Russian navy,” Kortunov explained, potentially “denying free access to the North Atlantic Ocean.” This is particularly sensitive given the importance of the North Atlantic as a route for these submarines, a key component of Russia’s strategic deterrent.

However, the situation isn’t viewed solely as a threat. Moscow also perceives a benefit in the widening fissures within the transatlantic alliance. The U.S. Pursuit of Greenland, and the reactions it has elicited, serve to validate Russia’s long-held position that international law is often secondary to the realities of power.

The Arctic has seen increasing militarization in recent years, a trend that has accelerated since 2022. This re-militarization has coincided with a shift in Arctic diplomacy, including the diplomatic boycott of the Arctic Council under Russia’s rotating chair in 2022 and the subsequent decisions by Finland and Sweden to pursue NATO membership.

Beyond the immediate concerns regarding submarine access, the situation in Greenland is occurring against a broader backdrop of great-power competition in the Arctic. The United States, like Russia, views the region as strategically important, both for its potential energy resources and as a location for establishing a stronger military foothold. China’s growing influence in the Arctic, through scientific research and collaboration with Russia, is also being closely monitored by Washington.

Experts suggest that a more beneficial approach for the U.S. Would involve a combination of restraint and proactive diplomacy, built upon shared interests and a recognition of competitive coexistence. This would avoid escalating tensions while still allowing the U.S. To pursue its strategic objectives in the region. The Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft suggests that competitive coexistence and trilateral cooperation are more beneficial than unilateral action.

The evolving dynamics in the Arctic highlight the increasing complexity of international relations and the challenges of navigating a world where power dynamics are shifting. As Russia continues to invest in its Arctic military capabilities, the West is responding with increased vigilance and a growing commitment to strengthening its presence in the region.