EU in the Arctic: Soft Power or Overextension?

What is the Arctic for the European Union?

In this episode of What’s New, host Serafima Andreeva speaks with Andreas Raspotnik, Director of the High North Center for Business and Governance and senior researcher affiliated with the Fridtjof Nansen Institute and The Arctic Institute, about the evolution of EU Arctic policy and what Brussels can realistically achieve in a rapidly changing geopolitical landscape.

The conversation traces the EU’s Arctic engagement from the 2008 Joint Communication to the 2021 strategy for a “peaceful, sustainable and prosperous Arctic,” and the ongoing update expected later this year. Raspotnik explains how EU Arctic policy operates as an umbrella over fragmented competences, with fisheries at the supranational level, foreign and security policy largely in member state hands, and growing tensions between climate ambition and geopolitical urgency.

Greenland and critical minerals sit at the heart of the debate. As Europe seeks strategic autonomy and reduced dependency on China and Russia, the Arctic is increasingly viewed as a source of rare earths and other resources central to the green transition. Yet the EU cannot compel companies to invest, nor can it act as a traditional hard power.

The episode also examines the controversies that have shaped EU-Arctic relations, from the seal products ban to proposals for oil and gas moratoria, and asks whether Brussels risks overextension. With security now expected to feature more prominently in the upcoming policy revision, including references to Arctic security debates raised at Arctic Frontiers in Tromsø, the EU faces a structural question: how far can it move into hard security when defence remains a member state competence?

Raspotnik argues for a practical shift. The European Arctic could be treated as a European neighbourhood alongside the Mediterranean and Eastern Europe. That would require more institutional capacity in Brussels and a deeper understanding of Arctic societies and economies before regulatory decisions are made.

Transcript

Serafima Andreeva: Welcome to What's New. Today we will be covering a topic that is more and more relevant, you can say in recent times, the European Union or Europe in the Arctic. And to cover that topic, we will have an expert guest with us today, also from the Arctic Institute, but also the director from the High North Center and also a colleague at FNI, Andreas Rassbottnik. It's great to have you.Andreas Raspotnik: Hi Sarah, thanks for having me. Thanks for talking about the EU and the Arctic.Serafima Andreeva: First of all, before we dive into the nitty-gritty details, what is the Arctic for the European Union? How do they view the Arctic?Andreas Raspotnik: So from a policy perspective, the EU has an Arctic policy since 2008. And such an idea about the Arctic and what the Arctic entails and what the Arctic really is about. The question is really, what is the Arctic for us continental Europeans? And I think that is...Andreas Raspotnik: It's a more abstract and maybe philosophical question even. But if you go back in history, you might know that when Finland and Sweden joined the European Union, Finnish president Paavolipunen came up with the Northern Dimension Initiative. So that was the idea, a bit, to bring the North into the orbit of Brussels and non-Arctic, not Northern debates at that time. And that idea has faded out.Andreas Raspotnik: In a way for many, many different reasons. But that was the attempt to make sure that European policymakers not only think about the South and the East or maybe the West with the transatlantic relationship, but also back in the time think about the North in many ways. So we can talk what that means today. But the key question is really what is the Arctic for Europe and where does it start, where does it end?Andreas Raspotnik: And in our research, we have often said, okay, there's the European Arctic, there's the circumpolar Arctic. So the geographic European Arctic, starting from Northern Finland, North Sweden, Northern Norway, Iceland, Greenland, parts of EU territory, other regions are closely connected to the EU. But I think from the geographic perspective, I would argue that EU policy makers and people that have about knowledge that the Arctic exists would say that the European Arctic is a bit Europe's own neighborhood and that there are more, the EU as an actor can do more in that part of the Arctic than beyond. Although the EU has and Europe has certain competences and interests of obviously also beyond that European Arctic.Serafima Andreeva: I mean, but speaking of the capacity for action that the European Union has in the Arctic, you mentioned that it can do more. If we see the documents coming from the European Union, historically going back in time, there's been a lot of documents.Andreas Raspotnik: AndSerafima Andreeva: And my question to you is that when you speak about the development or the potential for action for the EU in the Arctic, do you think, I mean, is it fragmented or is it, do you see it as like coherent work?Andreas Raspotnik: I think the main problem as a starting point is often like what is Europe, you know, in that regard and what is European in EU European and what is then maybe member state initiatives and also taking account diverse institutional voices that is the European Union. But you're completely right. So the European Union as an institutional actor has an Arctic policy since 2008. And that is what we call today the Joint Communication on Arctic Matters.Andreas Raspotnik: Titled differently, but starting in 2008, there was an update in 2012, 2016 and the latest update by the European Commission and the external action service. So the supranational level issuing that latest Arctic policy in 2021. And now they're the processes updating it. But, and now there's so many, but you know, then you have other institutional voices like the European parliament. They also have their ideas about the EU and the Arctic trying to pushAndreas Raspotnik: Commission and the excellent service to actually develop a policy. And then you have the member states level and normally you have member states concluding to those thoughts of the EU and saying okay yes this is actually something also on the member state level is something to put forward. In addition to that various member states from small to the bigger ones have Arctic policies, strategies, guidelines as well we talk about Germany, France, Poland.Andreas Raspotnik: Spain has a polar idea, Italy just recently issued one, the Netherlands, the Brits had one before, and obviously the Arctic states, Sweden, Finland and Denmark. And to various degrees, those member states mentioned the EU within those documents. Okay, together on the EU level, we could do A, B and C. What you might mean with a more coherent and comprehensive approach is like, knowing that Europe is a complexAndreas Raspotnik: Animal, you know, you have various different competencies that are on the supranational level, on the EU level, and then others have the member state. So, for example, fisheries is a very much an Arctic topic, it's an EU competence. Of course, what we talk about today with the entire geopolitical discussions, Greenland, that's more foreign policy, a matter in many ways that's still a member state level. So the question is, like, how do you bring that together?Andreas Raspotnik: And then the other thing I always want, I always try to add in those discussions like, and it's not an EU issue. What is, what is a policy? What is an Arctic policy? And for me, particularly in the EU setting, those are 15, 20 pages describing the ideas based on the various competences that the EU has for the Arctic, you know, but it's an umbrella on this policy. You can't mention everything. I think more important is then what are the actions based on that policy and how do you try toAndreas Raspotnik: Bring the Arctic and the entire Arctic orbit into other policies as well, maybe of larger scale, like what you did with the European Green Deal or the Global Strategy. And I think that is a bit for the Arctic world almost more important because mean, the policy is a policy and we love to analyze policy and words and the narratives and the semantics. But the problem, the issue is like, how do you actionize those policy? What kind of action do you take based on your, on yourAndreas Raspotnik: Competences on the powers you have in order to achieve something. So a very practical answer, if the EU has always emphasized climate change as a key topic to be covered in your policy and all related research, that is something that can be tackled in Brussels. You spend more money, that has an impact. So that is one of those, you know, what is the policy, but how do you actionize that? And what are the different voices and how do you bring them together? And that is complicated on an EU level because you haveAndreas Raspotnik: Different institutions, different competences, different interests, obviously. It's a continent of, it's an institution of 27 member states with different identities and different interests. So why should Croatia be interested in the Arctic? And then, you know, for example, less, you should be less focused on Mediterranean issues. So it's about compromises.Serafima Andreeva: I mean, and you mentioned also the 2021 document, a stronger EU engagement for peaceful, sustainable and prosperous Arctic. And also mentioning Greenland, is now an EU office in Nuuk. It's very clear that Greenland is of high priority to the EU. And I looked at the strategy on what was inside it and they said that critical minerals in the green transition, it's a focal point.Serafima Andreeva: In this strategy. Care a lot about critical minerals and resources. So my question to you is then what room for maneuver does actually soft power influential actor like the EU have on quite, you know, practical concerns considering critical minerals? Is it through supporting economic developments or what is happening on the ground?Andreas Raspotnik: Excellent point. Let me start with an anecdote. I remember when I did my PhD research back in the days, I asked those questions to commission officials, but we forgot to shipping and maritime transportation, know, the Northern Sea Road and everything. And the response, and I think that was a very honest one from one commission official I got was, Andreas, keep in mind, we are not a business organization, you know, we work on policy, so we can come up with regulations that...Andreas Raspotnik: Drive something or not, but we cannot force European businesses to act or to develop an interest or then eventually to develop a business case in a certain region. And I think that holds very much true for the critical mineral situation for any research discussion in the Arctic as well today. So again, if we go back to 2021, October 2021, that was the latest one.Andreas Raspotnik: You're completely right. That was a different, I wouldn't say it's side guys, but a bit of a different era with, you know, the European Green Deal was a big issue then. Okay. How can you move forward in that green transition? Obviously the picture changed with February 2022 and the entire impact Russia's full scale invasion had and Ukraine had on Europe at large, but then also on the Arctic because the idea, for example, of the Green Deal was to become more independent.Andreas Raspotnik: From Russian oil and gas in the long run. Now we had to act faster as Europeans. We became more dependent a bit from Norwegian gas, for example, you And now we have this entire debate on critical minerals where you know better than I do, you know how dependent Europe is in that regard from China and other actors. And in order to become more strategically autonomous, what is the big idea? It's like...Andreas Raspotnik: Critical minerals or resources in the North are more more discussed. It's not only about Greenland, it's also about the parts that we know better, bit, North Norway, but also Northern Sweden and Finland in that regard and the opportunities there. But what can the EU really do? So again, we talk about the soft power issue. Can we come up with regulation, not precisely only on the Arctic, but maybe in general on mining something that take into accountAndreas Raspotnik: Whatever, more sustainable approach, know, more conversational approach beforehand with communities, et cetera, et cetera. And that has an active impact. And that is something the EU could do. But then again, they cannot, they can maybe create the umbrella, but they cannot say to a business in Germany or a player in France, so now you have to go to Greenland to start exploiting there, you know, after.Andreas Raspotnik: All the kind of discussions with GreenLands, et cetera. So at least in my understanding. So and then again, you can create and you can kind of like build a certain starting point. But then, know, it's for the industries to decide, et cetera. But again, to put, for example, minerals more strategically in a strategy or in the policy, which will be done for sure whenAndreas Raspotnik: The update that is currently worked on, will be published by the end of the year, you will have more on Greenland, even more, and you will have more minerals, you know. You create a kind of a narrative, okay, this is another place, you know, that we have to be active and that we have to look at. And from there, I think you create then certain synergy effects that could do more. But again, and I think that's, and we have seen that with the Greenland discussion now, that is something Europe could provide, you know, if we really believe in us, as I said, this soft power idea, this...Andreas Raspotnik: If we are, maybe arrogantly or not, but if we are the continent that takes into account the norms and values that we are, that is something to offer if we mean it seriously. And now with the entire second Trump administration discussion on tariffs, cetera, that is another thing, free trade leadership in the world, the single market of Europe, 400 million people, it's something to offer. But we need to be...Andreas Raspotnik: More proactive and maybe more, I don't know, blunt sometimes that we have to, even better I would say, outline our interests, know, and preferably together and not like done individually by France, Poland, Germany and all, but together and say, okay, this is Europe. And I think there's a lot of things happening on the EU level in order to do that, not only in resources, but you know, in security issues, know, and et cetera.Serafima Andreeva: You, mentioned when you were talking about this a bit earlier, you mentioned regulations when we were talking about what could contribute or what the EU could contribute with. And I was thinking about that.Serafima Andreeva: EU's engagement in the Arctic, hasn't really been free for controversies historically. mean, either it's about the suggestions to moratorium for oil and gas. For example, the opposition from Canada and Russia is a classic to the Arctic Council because of the seal ban. And for Russia, it's because of general tensions with the EU. SoSerafima Andreeva: My question to you, is about the potential for an overextension problematique for the EU. mean, where does the limit for the influence go? What can the EU do and what can the EU not do? You mentioned soft power. We have been talking about soft power. But where are the limits to that soft power? And can we see restrictions already coming from the EU member?Serafima Andreeva: Octet member states that there are some like conflicts there or is it all good and okay?Andreas Raspotnik: This is a really excellent and broad question. Where to start? So what we have seen over the years is, yes, there has been some northern states been more pro, more EU involvement, you know, and some less. But I think the question here is really, it's about not even an EU Arctic question, but a broader EU question. What kind of competences do you give the supranational level, you know?Andreas Raspotnik: Move it away from the national level. And I think that is, we don't need to talk about a United States of Europe something idea, but what is the core political idea of Europe? Are we satisfied enough by an economic union or do we want to work more and more together on that? But that means less competences to the member states in many levels and more to the supranational level than we come to a question, what is the right balanceAndreas Raspotnik: What we see now, now, and that's going to be the interesting thing, you know, with geopolitical changes. And I'm not only talking obviously about Trump and what happened over the last few, last year maybe, but of course also the Russia's war against Ukraine. It's like, are we really moving closer together also on matters of security and all kinds of other aspects, you know? And it has to be seen.Andreas Raspotnik: For example, in the Arctic matter, if we had some very strong voices now on Greenland, we record this after the Arctic Frontiers Conference in Tromsø where the High Representative Kaya Callas was here making very clear that the new policy will include Arctic security. Whatever, we know what Arctic security is. What is meant by Arctic security is this hard security military aspect, although we are both aware that, especially in the Arctic setting, we talkAndreas Raspotnik: Talk about many different securities that we have to tackle but the EU will talk about hard security in the future although this is per se not a competence you know it's a member state driven member state driven so we will see if that interest will you know stay alive even after Greenland has been solved or not solved you know what happened after Davos soAndreas Raspotnik: And then in the long run, we could see, if there's even more substantial focus on the North, know, hopefully together, what could be then our limits or not our limits? Again, I'll come back to, you know, if we assume that we live in this new era, you know, what President Stubb now often articulated at this value-based realism that Europe, for example, could bring to the table, you know, we have to clearly outline our interests, you know, and keep in mindAndreas Raspotnik: That our interests are based on different, we have to balance different interests, you know? So as you said before, it was controversial. I the seal ban was a controversial topic, the moratorium potential, the moratorium suggestion was controversial, but where does it come from, you know? A seal ban idea does not per se come from the idea that you want to harm Arctic citizens or indigenous citizens. You also want to provide a certain policy in favor, where most Europeans are in favor for, you know?Andreas Raspotnik: The moratorium idea was also under the European Green Deal thinking. It most likely if you talk to, I don't know, a plumber in Madrid and a hairdresser in Zagreb, you know, they would probably agree with you. Said, yeah, yeah, we should not exploit any oil and gas because we need to protect the Arctic. You know, that is like you can argue against or in favor of that argumentation, but that is the different interests that you have to keep in mind when.Andreas Raspotnik: Developing an interest. And then we know the complexity, know, that the Norwegian argument in that regard, but you need the gas because of Ukraine and Russia. And we know that. So, you know, that is the balance that you have to take now. But you have to more clearly discuss them and outline. And I said, OK, this is our strategic interests are now the minerals in Greenland. And in order to help create an environment that both satisfy the Greenlanders and European companies in that regard, we want to do A, B and C.Andreas Raspotnik: And that includes what were the power units. You know, we want to spend more money on educating education in Greenland in regard to that. That could be a concrete step. You know, this kind of long term strategies, I know it's always tricky and then, you know, for us, it's easy to talk about that because we don't have to implement them or think about them. But it is that is something I don't know if a policy is the right place to to have them outlined. ButAndreas Raspotnik: It could be a good starting point.Serafima Andreeva: You mentioned also earlier that you're at Arctic or you have been now at Arctic frontiers and there's more talk about security. You mentioned that in the updated version of the policy document, there will be more focus on security. And this is kind of the global trend we see. There is a lot more talk about hard security. But my question to you is that when you say the word security and EU and Arctic, youSerafima Andreeva: Talk about human security, food security type of thing, or are you talking about military security, hard security? And if you are talking about the self-security, then what is the actual room for maneuver to include the hard security? Because this can be a quite touchy topic historically.Andreas Raspotnik: That's a fantastic question I think what has been highlighted here, okay, yes, we're in changing geopolitical times. And now the EU and Europe at large also needs to think more on this like.Andreas Raspotnik: What has been taken care of by the Americans, know, defense and deterrence and all these questions. So the hard security. But I think that was made very clear at Arctic Frontiers and very clear by Kaya Kalas was like, the biggest threat in the long run is climate change. So we talk about the different kind of security aspects, and that includes in an Arctic setting, as I said, food security, human security, et cetera, economic security in many ways. mean, we live in the European Arctic, or we work on European Arctic.Andreas Raspotnik: And there we have thriving communities and resources that are key for Europe when we talk about not only oil and gas but fisheries and others. the question is then how again do we balance it? You if we can only focus on one thing you know and I mean there's often you know it better than I do about this dual use and all those debates and of course there's some civilian aspects in it and we'll profit blah blah blah but how can we make sureAndreas Raspotnik: That we don't forget about the other securities in the policy. And especially if we have so much capacity. And I don't think it will get lost because the research programs are running and exist programs. So there is that will continue. the other initiatives on different aspects will also not appear because more money and efforts are put into.Andreas Raspotnik: More heart security aspect. But in the long run, have to keep in mind, we have to balance those things and we have to make sure that tourism is another thing, you know, that we create an environment also in Europe, you know, that takes into account Arctic challenges and needs also and be, you know, try to...Andreas Raspotnik: Again, that's what I meant by bringing the Arctic also closer to Brussels in this various policy. You don't need to have the Arctic in mind every time you come up with regulation. you said, know, the competences that the regulations the EU has developed, Europe has developed, have effects outside Europe, you know. And the Silbermann was a classic on it. You can argue from European point of view why this was a advantage for Europe. if you keep that in mind, if you try to console...Andreas Raspotnik: Consult people beforehand, you could this soft power idea, you know, you could actively involve them. And that's tricky because it requires a lot of work. And a lot of people would disagree that the EU is actually doing that. But again, it's the beauty of Europe, I will always say is this idea of compromise and that we base our policy in an ideal world on negotiated solutions. So, you know, you meet in Brussels, you go back and forth, you go to a member state, you know, you get criticized.Andreas Raspotnik: Come back. you know it takes time but eventually it should be one of the you know today 27 member states with different cultural identities, histories trying to come up with ideas for a continent you know. And but we have to take into account you know that we sometimes don't know that much about the north you know and what is happening up there and how that this is actually a neighborhood or backyard or whatever you want to call it.Andreas Raspotnik: Not similar, as much as the Mediterranean or the East or...Serafima Andreeva: I think this brings me also to my last question for you then, because you've been talking about these different issue areas that are very important for the EU to be aware of, especially now, especially in this very important, very critical time. But let's pretend that you have all the power in the world, in the EU only. You are in Brussels right now and you can go to whoever you want.Andreas Raspotnik: Mm.Serafima Andreeva: And say that the suggestion that you come with right now, you can have one suggestion, two suggestions, You're in Brussels, you can do whatever you want and whatever you say now, it will change everything you wanted to change about the EU and the Arctic. What do you say? Who do you say it to? What do do?Andreas Raspotnik: Holy moly.Andreas Raspotnik: Don't forget that again, I come back to that, that there is a neighborhood that is not the Mediterranean, that is not the East, but that is as European as the others, you know. And don't assume that this is an empty space for many, different reasons.Andreas Raspotnik: Put it.Andreas Raspotnik: Act accordingly. get as much understanding about that space as possible before you act, you know. And in order to do so, and that has always been one of my criticisms, was like, you need resources, you need a certain budget line, you need people in Brussels, in member states, to think about that, you know, and not per se now because we have a crisis and a US president wantedAndreas Raspotnik: To buy Greenland or whatever, know, and so now you're in a schweizmolt. Again, easier for us to say, but I think strategically, okay, there is this space. It's not empty. It's not like only polar bears and sea ice melting, but we need people to work on that and to understand it. And then again, try to include it into in certain aspects of day-to-day work that is, I would say mainly focused on the continent, but you know, and I think that is...Andreas Raspotnik: Something, it's maybe a rather small practical step, but what I often have seen like, we would assume in the Arctic world, you know, that because there's a policy, there are so many people working on it. It's not. It's a few people, you know, so, but you know, how do you make sure that people not working on the Arctic, you know, per se, but whose work is affecting the Arctic haven't the same idea as we have, you know, so it's maybe you...Andreas Raspotnik: You need more people to work on it or you need to better connect them. And that is an institutional decision on how to do that. And it requires work and very, I don't know, draining and boring work of getting together all the time, discuss it. But you know, that is something I think that would help, you know, to better connect. So that the Arctic is not an ad hoc policy issue, ad hoc space in a way, so that, oh, now there's a crisis, now we have to focus on.Andreas Raspotnik: But you know that there is an understanding that this is as much European as the Mediterranean is as a neighborhood or as a backyard as Eastern Europe is, even beyond that Ukraine.Serafima Andreeva: I think it's a great selling point. The Arctic is as much European as the Ukraine and the Mediterranean.Andreas Raspotnik: That was a really...Andreas Raspotnik: Yeah, but the idea is probably really boring. yeah, maybe we have to start with some boring practical steps. I don't know.Serafima Andreeva: No, don't sell it. think it's very good. You should go straight to the European Commission and European Union and just say what you feel and then hopefully they'll implement it. But thank you. It was great to have you and thank you for listening, for the ones listening.