5月中旬，美国国务卿布林肯先后访问丹麦和冰岛，并参加第12届北极理事会部长级会议，推动北极国家通过《雷克雅未克共同宣言》和《2021-2030年北极理事会战略计划》。北极八国外长就北极环境保护、经济社会可持续发展、强化北极理事会机制等议题达成一系列共识。

但是，面子上的“一团和气”盖不住骨子里的“勾心斗角”。布林肯在访问和参会期间不断渲染俄罗斯威胁北极地区和平稳定，要求俄方遵守国际法和区域规则。从布林肯相关表态来看，美俄在北极安全问题上的矛盾主要集中于三点：

第一，美一边渲染俄罗斯军事威胁，一边强化盟友军事部署，将“美式双标”展现得淋漓尽致。布林肯此次在冰岛和丹麦访问期间，不断指责俄罗斯搞北极“军事化”，抬升地区安全风险，加大引发意外事件和误判的可能性，并一再重复“北极是没有冲突的地区”的愿景。与此同时，他又特意造访美军在冰岛凯夫拉维克和格陵兰岛图勒的两处重要军事基地，展现推动美国军事力量重返北极的坚定决心，并当面称赞丹麦拨款强化北大西洋和北极防御的决定。

第二，在北极航道规则问题上再提“美国立场”。布林肯此次直指俄罗斯在北极提出“非法海上主张”，点名俄罗斯有关北方海航线的管理规定“不符合国际法”，直言美国将敦促俄罗斯在内的所有国家“基于规则、规定和现有承诺”行事。阻碍“航行自由”俨然要成为俄罗斯继推动地区“军事化”后的第二大“罪状”。

第三，拒绝俄罗斯改革北极理事会提议，在区域治理机制走向上坚持“美国方案”。俄罗斯外长拉夫罗夫在会议发言中明确提出，将北极理事会合作关系向军事安全领域延伸，以缓和地区局势，俄罗斯担任轮值主席国期间将把恢复北极国家武装力量总参谋长定期会晤机制列为优先事项，并提议首先举办军事专家级别会议。但布林肯直接否定俄方提议，称《渥太华宣言》规定北极理事会不处理军事安全问题，理事会应继续将重点放在环境保护、海上安全和原住民福祉等方面的和平合作上，并坚持应对气候变化是优先议题。

北极国家在区域安全问题上龃龉不断的背后，是美国利用各方关切和矛盾，强化自身主导地位的惯用伎俩在作祟。布林肯相关言论也从一个侧面折射出拜登政府在处理北极安全问题上的核心观点和未来趋势：

首先，以气候变化问题引领区域合作。将安全议题还是气变议题作为北极理事会的优先事项，实则反应的是美俄对北极治理的路线之争和主导权之争。拜登政府有意利用气候变化议题争取北极国家在区域治理问题上的最大公约数，进而拔高北极理事会在区域治理体系中的地位，以厘定理事会制度架构和议事机制为抓手，实现北极国家“主体责任”和北极地区“闭门治理”的战略意图。如布林肯所言，“拜登政府重新关注环境，重新承诺和努力就解决相关问题采取实际行动”。进而，从环境保护和气候变化角度出发，拜登政府提出“北冰洋开放要符合一定标准”。整个政策逻辑的落脚点，就是美国要主导制定和监督执行这个“标准”，而中国等域外国家参与北极活动就必须“遵守规则及做出的承诺”。

其次，以北极军事化问题划分美俄阵营。美国试图将俄罗斯军事威胁作为其加快海空军事力量重返北极，深化与挪威、丹麦、冰岛等北欧北极国家同盟关系的正当性与合理性基础。布林肯在丹麦访问期间明确称“拜登打心眼里是大西洋主义者”，意在影射二战后北美和西欧国家强化军事、政治和经济领域的团结与合作，共同对抗苏联威胁，进而阐释拜登政府以北约机制为基础对北极地区盟友和伙伴的政治支持和安全承诺，以共同应对俄罗斯在北极的“军事扩张”。同时，美国也有意利用当前北极“安全困境”引发的域内小国对美国的安全依赖和俄罗斯对美国的对话需求，巩固自身在区域治理问题上的领导力和话语权。

最后，以海上行动确立区域规则。拜登政府一直将“基于规则的国际秩序”作为口头禅，此次布林肯更是将北极地区“立规矩”的矛头直接指向俄罗斯有关北方海航线的管理规定，有意以此打压俄罗斯近年在北极的快速发展势头。值得注意的是，拜登同期在美国海岸警卫队学院发表讲话，要求美国海岸警卫队在制定行为规范方面发挥重要作用，捍卫北极与南海“开放和安全的海上航道”。鉴此，未来不排除美国复制在南海地区相关海上行动的成熟模式，派遣海岸警卫队破冰船等舰艇，在北方海航线再次上演“航行自由行动”。美俄双方在北极海上的矛盾仍有进一步加剧的风险。

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.