北极的战略三角？中俄美力量动态对地区安全的影响（英文）

SUMMARYw This SIPRI Insights on Peace and Security paper examines security challenges arising from the Arctic activities of three actors with a substantial ‘footprint’—China, Russia and the United States—and how they might be addressed in existing and new frameworks.Arctic and non-Arctic states want to exploit commercial opportunities created by a changing physical environment. Arctic states agree that climate-related challenges can be addressed through cooperation within existing institutions. However, to ensure that increasing human activity stays within acceptable environmental and human security risk levels, non-Arctic states need to be engaged.The risk of unwanted escalation in military tension in the Arctic due to deteriorating relations among major powers over disputes arising elsewhere has grown to the point where it cannot be ignored. A steady increase in military investments in the Arctic, or Arctic operations, will continue, but there is no ready-made framework to address military security challenges.Issues that occupy a ‘grey zone’ between military and non-military security will have to be addressed as digital and transport infrastructure expand in the Arctic. However, there is little experience in how diverse state and non-state actors can manage cooperation and competition simultaneously.A STRATEGIC TRIANGLE IN THE ARCTIC? IMPLICATIONS OF CHINA–RUSSIA–UNITED STATES POWER DYNAMICS FOR REGIONAL SECURITYian anthony, ekaterina klimenko, fei suNo. 2021/3 March 2021SIPRI Insights on Peace and SecurityI. IntroductionOver the past decades, regional cooperation among the Arctic states (Canada, Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, Sweden, Russia and the United States) has advanced the Arctic as a region of low tension. The Arctic is generally well regulated. Oil and gas are extracted in territorial waters or on land where jurisdiction is not disputed, while the use of common assets such as fish stocks is subject to regional and bilateral agreements. Maritime boundary disputes between allies (Canada and the USA) will not escalate militarily. However, the long-standing ambition to keep the Arctic as a region of low tension and high cooperation is being increasingly challenged in light of three developments. The first factor is due to climate change. Rising temperatures and the melting of sea ice have increased accessibility for commercial shipping and made human access easier. An increase in commercial activity and the promise of further development of resources in the future has created new opportunities, but also new challenges. A second factor is the increased interest and activity of states from outside the region in Arctic affairs. The Arctic has been managed by a regional governance regime, but a wider spectrum of states have become more active in commercial projects and seek greater access to the resources the region contains. This has triggered a discussion of who should design the rules that will apply.1A third factor is the spillover ef