5月中旬，美國國務卿布林肯先後訪問丹麥和冰島，並參加第12屆北極理事會部長級會議，推動北極國家通過《雷克雅未克共同宣言》和《2021-2030年北極理事會戰略計劃》。北極八國外長就北極環境保護、經濟社會可持續發展、強化北極理事會機制等議題達成一系列共識。

但是，面子上的“一團和氣”蓋不住骨子裡的“勾心鬥角”。布林肯在訪問和參會期間不斷渲染俄羅斯威脅北極地區和平穩定，要求俄方遵守國際法和區域規則。從布林肯相關表態來看，美俄在北極安全問題上的矛盾主要集中於三點：

第一，美一邊渲染俄羅斯軍事威脅，一邊強化盟友軍事部署，將“美式雙標”展現得淋漓盡致。布林肯此次在冰島和丹麥訪問期間，不斷指責俄羅斯搞北極“軍事化”，抬升地區安全風險，加大引發意外事件和誤判的可能性，並一再重複“北極是沒有衝突的地區”的願景。與此同時，他又特意造訪美軍在冰島凱夫拉維克和格陵蘭島圖勒的兩處重要軍事基地，展現推動美國軍事力量重返北極的堅定決心，併當面稱讚丹麥撥款強化北大西洋和北極防禦的決定。

第二，在北極航道規則問題上再提“美國立場”。布林肯此次直指俄羅斯在北極提出“非法海上主張”，點名俄羅斯有關北方海航線的管理規定“不符合國際法”，直言美國將敦促俄羅斯在內的所有國家“基於規則、規定和現有承諾”行事。阻礙“航行自由”儼然要成為俄羅斯繼推動地區“軍事化”後的第二大“罪狀”。

第三，拒絕俄羅斯改革北極理事會提議，在區域治理機制走向上堅持“美國方案”。俄羅斯外長拉夫羅夫在會議發言中明確提出，將北極理事會合作關係向軍事安全領域延伸，以緩和地區局勢，俄羅斯擔任輪值主席國期間將把恢復北極國家武裝力量總參謀長定期會晤機制列為優先事項，並提議首先舉辦軍事專家級別會議。但布林肯直接否定俄方提議，稱《渥太華宣言》規定北極理事會不處理軍事安全問題，理事會應繼續將重點放在環境保護、海上安全和原住民福祉等方面的和平合作上，並堅持應對氣候變化是優先議題。

北極國家在區域安全問題上齟齬不斷的背後，是美國利用各方關切和矛盾，強化自身主導地位的慣用伎倆在作祟。布林肯相關言論也從一個側面折射出拜登政府在處理北極安全問題上的核心觀點和未來趨勢：

首先，以氣候變化問題引領區域合作。將安全議題還是氣變議題作為北極理事會的優先事項，實則反應的是美俄對北極治理的路線之爭和主導權之爭。拜登政府有意利用氣候變化議題爭取北極國家在區域治理問題上的最大公約數，進而拔高北極理事會在區域治理體系中的地位，以釐定理事會制度架構和議事機製為抓手，實現北極國家“主體責任”和北極地區“閉門治理”的戰略意圖。如布林肯所言，“拜登政府重新關注環境，重新承諾和努力就解決相關問題採取實際行動”。進而，從環境保護和氣候變化角度出發，拜登政府提出“北冰洋開放要符合一定標準”。整個政策邏輯的落腳點，就是美國要主導制定和監督執行這個“標準”，而中國等域外國家參與北極活動就必須“遵守規則及做出的承諾”。

其次，以北極軍事化問題劃分美俄陣營。美國試圖將俄羅斯軍事威脅作為其加快海空軍事力量重返北極，深化與挪威、丹麥、冰島等北歐北極國家同盟關係的正當性與合理性基礎。布林肯在丹麥訪問期間明確稱“拜登打心眼裡是大西洋主義者”，意在影射二戰後北美和西歐國家強化軍事、政治和經濟領域的團結與合作，共同對抗蘇聯威脅，進而闡釋拜登政府以北約機製為基礎對北極地區盟友和夥伴的政治支持和安全承諾，以共同應對俄羅斯在北極的“軍事擴張”。同時，美國也有意利用當前北極“安全困境”引發的域內小國對美國的安全依賴和俄羅斯對美國的對話需求，鞏固自身在區域治理問題上的領導力和話語權。

最後，以海上行動確立區域規則。拜登政府一直將“基於規則的國際秩序”作為口頭禪，此次布林肯更是將北極地區“立規矩”的矛頭直接指向俄羅斯有關北方海航線的管理規定，有意以此打壓俄羅斯近年在北極的快速發展勢頭。值得注意的是，拜登同期在美國海岸警衛隊學院發表講話，要求美國海岸警衛隊在制定行為規範方面發揮重要作用，捍衛北極與南海“開放和安全的海上航道”。鑒此，未來不排除美國複製在南海地區相關海上行動的成熟模式，派遣海岸警衛隊破冰船等艦艇，在北方海航線再次上演“航行自由行動”。美俄雙方在北極海上的矛盾仍有進一步加劇的風險。

In mid-May, U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken visited Denmark and Iceland. He also attended the 12th Arctic Council Ministerial Meeting in Reykjavik to promote the adoption of the 2021 Arctic Council Joint Declaration and Strategic Plan (2021–30) by the Arctic countries. The eight Arctic foreign ministers reached consensus on a series of issues such as Arctic environmental protection, sustainable economic and social development and strengthening Arctic Council mechanisms.

However, the harmony on the surface cannot cover the rivalry in the bones. During his visit and participation in the meeting, Blinken constantly exaggerated Russia's threat to peace and stability in the Arctic region and demanded that it comply with international law and regional rules.From Blinken's statements, it would appear that the U.S.-Russia conflict over Arctic security centers on three points.

First, the U.S. is exaggerating the Russian military threat while strengthening the military deployment of its allies, showing the “American double standard” to its fullest. During his visit to Iceland and Denmark, Blinken repeatedly accused Russia of militarizing the Arctic and raising regional security risks, which he said could lead to accidents and miscalculations. He repeated his concept of the Arctic as a conflict-free zone.In addition, he made a special visit to two important U.S. military bases in Keflavik, Iceland, and Thule, Greenland, to show his firm determination to promote the return of U.S. military forces to the region. In person, he praised Denmark's decision to allocate funds to strengthen the defense of the North Atlantic and the Arctic.

Second, the “U.S. position” on the Arctic shipping lane rules was mentioned again. This time, Blinken accused Russia of making illegal maritime claims in the Arctic, calling Russia's Northern Sea Route rules “contrary to international law.” He said the U.S. would urge all countries, including Russia, to proceed “based on the rules, based on the norms, based on the commitments that they had each made.”You can see it coming: The United States is about to make obstruction of freedom of navigation Russia's second-biggest crime after allegedly promoting militarization.

Third, Blinken rejected Russia's proposal to reform the Arctic Council and insisted on the “American approach” to the direction of the regional governance mechanism. Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov proposed to extend the Arctic Council partnership to the military/security sphere in order to de-escalate the situation in the region, to prioritize the resumption of the mechanism of regular meetings of the chiefs of the general staffs of the Arctic states during the Russian chairmanship and to organize meetings of military experts.But Blinken directly rejected the Russian proposal, saying the Ottawa Declaration stipulates that the Arctic Council does not deal with military security issues and that it should continue to focus on peaceful cooperation on environmental protection, maritime security and the well-being of indigenous inhabitants. He reiterated that combating climate change is a priority issue.

Behind the disagreements among Arctic countries on regional security issues is the usual tactic of the United States: Exploit the concerns and conflicts of all parties to strengthen its dominant position. Blinken's remarks also give a hint about the Biden administration's core views and future trends in dealing with Arctic security issues.

First of all, climate change will lead to regional cooperation. The choice of security issues or climate change issues as the priority of the Arctic Council is in fact a reflection of the struggle between the U.S. and Russia over the direction and dominance of Arctic governance.The Biden administration intends to use the issue of climate change to win the largest possible number of votes from the Arctic states on regional governance issues and then elevate the status of the Arctic Council in the regional governance system. By working to clarify the institutional structure and deliberative mechanism, it is trying to realize its strategic intent of giving Arctic states shared responsibility for the region and engaging in closed-door governance.As Blinken said, the Biden administration has redirected its attention to the environment and renewed its commitment and efforts to take practical action to address issues. He then proposed opening up the Arctic Ocean to certain standards from the perspective of environmental protection and climate change. The entire policy logic is based on the idea that the U.S. should take the lead in setting and monitoring the implementation of these standards and that non-Arctic states, such as China, must abide by the rules and commitments they have made to participate in Arctic activities.

Second, the issue of militarization of the Arctic is used to define the American and Russian camps. The U.S. is trying to use the Russian military threat as a justification or rational basis for accelerating the return of U.S. naval and air forces to the Arctic and deepening alliances with Norway, Denmark, Iceland and other Nordic Arctic countries. During his visit to Denmark, Blinken explicitly stated that “President Biden is at heart an Atlanticist,” alluding to the strengthening of military, political and economic unity and cooperation between North American and Western European countries after World War II. His goal is to jointly confront the Soviet threat.And then Blinken moved on to explain the Biden administration's political support and security commitment to its Arctic allies and partners based on the NATO mechanism to jointly counter Russia's supposed military expansion. In addition, the U.S. also seems intent on taking advantage of the current Arctic security dilemma triggered by the dependence of small Arctic countries on the U.S. and Russia's demand for dialogue with the U.S. to consolidate its leadership and voice in regional governance issues.

Finally, maritime action is being taken to establish regional rules. The Biden administration's catchphrase is “rules-based international order.” This time, Blinken is pointing the finger directly at Russia's rules governing the Northern Sea Route, with the intent of suppressing Russia's rapid development momentum in the Arctic in recent years.It is worth noting that President Joe Biden was speaking at the same time at the United States Coast Guard Academy, asking the sailors to step up to what he called their important role in developing a code of conduct to keep the sea lanes open and secure in the Arctic and South China Sea. In light of this, U.S. replication of the mature pattern of maritime operations in the South China Sea by sending Coast Guard icebreakers and other ships to stage freedom of navigation operations in the Northern Sea Route cannot be ruled out. There is still a risk that the conflict between the U.S. and Russia in the Arctic Ocean will further intensify.