Podcast Summary: "Is the Arctic the World’s Next War Zone? With Kenneth R. Rosen"

Podcast: Intelligence Squared
Host: Adam McCauley
Guest: Kenneth R. Rosen
Date: January 30, 2026

Overview

In this episode, Adam McCauley interviews journalist and author Kenneth R. Rosen about his new book, Polar War: Submarine Spies and the Struggle for Power in a Melting Arctic. Together, they explore how climate change, military ambitions, natural resources, and geopolitical rivalry are rapidly transforming the Arctic from a zone of cooperation into a flashpoint for great power competition. The conversation offers historical context, illuminates key players (Russia, China, and the US), and highlights the implications for indigenous communities and international security.

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Why The Arctic? – The Shift to Global Relevance

[03:31 – 05:05]

• Rosen’s impetus to write the book stemmed from recognizing the lack of attention toward the Arctic as a site for potential conflict post-Ukraine invasion and pandemic.

• Initial perception of the Arctic as a domain dominated by indigenous peoples and wildlife has sharply shifted, with the region now at the epicenter of hybrid warfare and espionage.

  "I quickly learned that there wasn't an ‘Arctic’. That depending on who you were, where you worked, what your interests were, that's what defined the Arctic."
  — Kenneth R. Rosen [05:54]

• The Arctic "isn’t just one thing to one group," stressing its complex, fluid definition across science, defense, and national interests.

2. From Zone of Peace to Arena of Competition

[07:38 – 11:11]

• Historically, the Arctic was viewed as an opportunity for scientific collaboration, "a zone of peace" per Mikhail Gorbachev’s Murmansk speech; this consensus has eroded.
• Rapid climate change — warming "four to five times faster than the rest of the world" — has made states see new opportunities for shipping, resource extraction, and military advantage.

  "Instead of rallying around...our planet is sick...nations were saying, oh well, this is an opportunity for so many other things."
  — Kenneth R. Rosen [10:01]

3. The Major Powers: Russia, China, United States

[11:11 – 15:41]

• Russia: The top Arctic power, with 60% of its territory above the Arctic Circle and the strategic port of Murmansk.

• China: Pushing for the "Polar Silk Road," collaborating with Russia (but Russia is wary of dependency).

• US: Traditionally behind, but with renewed political rhetoric about acquiring Greenland and asserting Arctic influence.

  "Six months ago, I would have said no. The US is so far behind...it's almost a moot point..."
  — Kenneth R. Rosen [11:51]

• US motivations often cited are rare earths and minerals from Greenland, but "there is no real plan" or realistic timeline for extraction given American political cycles and lack of unified will.

4. Arctic European States: Cultures of Response

[19:00 – 22:28]

• The Ukraine crisis (2014, 2022) spurred investment in northern European military and civil infrastructure.
• Nordic nations embrace "total defense," integrating society into national security. Recent NATO expansions (Finland, Sweden) have filled strategic gaps and advanced planning.

  "...they form a more adversarial unit to a bigger nation…doubling down and really putting an effort into securing a region…of strategic value."
  — Kenneth R. Rosen [21:02]

5. Gray Zone Tactics & Hybrid Warfare in the Arctic

[22:28 – 27:23]

• Conflict in the Arctic is marked by ambiguity: drone incursions, suspected sabotage (e.g., severed undersea cables), GPS jamming.
• These acts fall "below the threshold of war"—difficult to attribute and designed to avoid direct conflict.

  "Gray zone tactics and hybrid warfare persist in daily life…it's not very clearly attributable."
  — Kenneth R. Rosen [23:24]

• Example: Svalbard’s critical satellite link being mysteriously cut, impacting NATO and civilian activities.

6. Indigenous Communities and Local vs. National Governance

[34:06 – 36:46]

• Arctic governance suffers from disconnects; capitals like Oslo are far removed from regions like Svalbard, yet make key decisions.
• US Arctic policy often fails to recognize unique regional needs (e.g., Alaska's renewable potential contrasts with federal rollback).
• Indigenous groups exhibit nuanced awareness, navigating between local interests and international influence.

  "They want to learn how to use the language that is being used to determine their future to their best interest..."
  — Kenneth R. Rosen [37:26]

7. Militarization and Infrastructure: Opportunity or Escalation?

[41:22 – 43:10]

• Historically, military investments have laid the groundwork for Arctic development (e.g., airports, ports).
• While military presence brings resources and capability, dual-use facilities (civilian/military) introduce risks of escalation.

  "It's the military that does the legwork before society blooms…military leads the way…in those more radical areas."
  — Kenneth R. Rosen [41:22]

8. Spotlight on Greenland: History and Today's Debate

[44:30 – 49:40]

• US interest in Greenland dates to the 19th century, with a tradition of purchasing territory for strategic ends.

• Greenland’s status is complicated: US military bases (by Danish agreement), but also a local push for Inuit independence now overshadowed by global power games.

  "We have inadvertently set back the Inuit people of Greenland by at least a decade in their search for independence."
  — Kenneth R. Rosen [48:24]

• The US–Denmark relationship already gives America nearly all the strategic access it needs; outright purchase is more political theater than strategic necessity.

9. Conclusions and Policy Recommendations

[49:40 – 53:10]

• Rosen’s book closes with calls for Arctic powers to develop "a broader military code of conduct" and to strengthen transatlantic ties.
• Escalating rhetoric may have outpaced the institutional mechanisms (like the Arctic Council) designed for cooperation.

  "Whether or not we can find that cooperation now... it's likely to deteriorate further before it gets better."
  — Kenneth R. Rosen [52:48]

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• On Perception Change:
  "What I found most interesting was...instead nations were saying, oh well, this is an opportunity for so many other things." — Rosen [10:01]

• The Gray Zone Reality:
  "Gray zone tactics and hybrid warfare persist in daily life...it falls below the threshold of war because it's asymmetric and it's not very clearly attributable." — Rosen [23:24]

• On the US Arctic Posture:
  "The US is so far behind in capitalizing on its interests in the north that it's almost a moot point..." — Rosen [11:51]

• Local Governance Disconnect:
  "Oslo...dictates how a non-militarized, visa-free zone should operate, yet has no true stake in being there..." — Rosen [34:06]

• On Militarization:
  "It's the military that does the legwork before society blooms." — Rosen [41:22]

• On Indigenous Setbacks:
  "We have inadvertently set back the Inuit people of Greenland by at least a decade in their search for independence." — Rosen [48:24]

Timestamps for Important Segments

• Introduction & Why the Arctic? – [03:31 – 05:54]
• Historical ‘Zone of Peace’ to Competition – [07:38 – 11:11]
• Russia, China, US in the Arctic – [11:11 – 15:41]
• European Arctic States – [19:00 – 22:28]
• Hybrid Warfare / Gray Zone Tactics – [22:28 – 27:23]
• Indigenous Perspectives and Local Disconnect – [34:06 – 37:26]
• Militarization and Infrastructure – [41:22 – 43:10]
• Greenland’s History and Current Debate – [44:30 – 49:40]
• Policy Recommendations & Final Thoughts – [49:40 – 53:10]

Tone and Language

The episode remained thoughtful and analytical throughout, blending policy analysis, historical framing, and first-hand reportage. Rosen’s tone is nuanced, at times cynical about political maneuvering, but empathetic toward the impact on local and indigenous populations.

Summary

Is the Arctic the World’s Next War Zone? presents a compelling, up-to-date analysis of the Arctic’s evolution from a cooperative scientific frontier to a strategic battleground. Kenneth R. Rosen brings urgent attention to the new power rivalries, blurred lines of conflict, indigenous challenges, and the uncertain future of governance in the North. For policy-watchers, scientists, and concerned global citizens, the episode makes clear: the Arctic is no longer remote. Its fate is tied to the choices—and conflicts—of the great powers.