Interaction between the Arctic and Non-Arctic States in Scientific Research and Practical Development of the Geopolitical Potential of the Arctic

Aim. Reveal the methodological role of ideas about the geopolitical potential of the state in making managerial decisions in the development of the space of the Russian Arctic. The article presents an overview of fundamental research and articles by foreign authors that addresses the problem of realizing the geopolitical potential of the Arctic.
Tasks. Development of the principles of geopolitical forecasting based on mathematical modeling of the geopolitical potential of the state and systematization of developments on the spatial development of the Russian Arctic as part of Greater Eurasia.
Methods. Mathematical modeling of geopolitical processes, medium-term forecasting of the spatial development of the Russian Arctic in the face of challenges from foreign states claiming its natural resources and territorial waters.
Results. It confirms the need to include scientific developments in the methodological apparatus of geopolitical research to identify qualitative and quantitative definitions of the geopolitical potential of the state, which contributes to ensuring the national security of Russia and improving its spatial development.
Conclusions. The transition to the sixth technological mode is not limited to a radical transformation of the country’s production complex, but also implies the need to create a unified infrastructure architecture for the Greater Eurasia (“smart” Eurasia), into which the Russian Arctic organically fits.

1. Baklanov P. Ya. Geopolitical Factors in Regional Development // Customs policy of Russia in the Far East [Tamozhennaya politika Rossii na Dal’nem Vostoke]. 2020. N 4 (93). Р. 75–83. (In Rus)

2. Vinokurov G. N., Konyakhin B. A. China’s Geopolitical Status as a Factor in Russia’s United States Nuclear Deterrence Policy // Strategic Stability [Strategicheskaya stabil›nost›]. 2008. N 2. P. 199–202. (In Rus)

3. Dodin D. A. Sustainable Development of the Arctic (Problems and Prospects). SPb. : Science, 2005. P. 283. (In Rus)

4. Kefeli I. F., Kuznetsov D. I. Eurasian Vector of Global Geopolitics. М. : Publishing house URight, 2018. (In Rus)

5. Korneev O. Y. Why Does Russia Need the Paleozoic Arctida? Expedition «Arctics-2012». SPb. : Nestor-History, 2018. (In Rus)

6. Kuchinskaya M.E. The Arctic in the Focus of Attention of the USA and NATO and Russia’s Security Interests // Problems of National Strategy [Problemy natsional’noi strategii]. 2020. N 1 (58). P. 68–89. (In Rus)

7. Lukin A.B., Yakunin B. I. Eurasian integration and development of Asian Russia // Ways and belts of Eurasia. National and international development projects in the Eurasian space and prospects for their conjugation / ed. A.B. Lukin, B. I. Yakunin. М. : Publishing house «The Whole World», 2019. (In Rus)

8. Lukin Y. F. Multidimensional of the Arctic Space. Arkhangelsk, 2017. (In Rus)

9. Osipov G. V., Sadovnichiy V. A., Yakunin B. I. Integral Eurasian infrastructure system as a priority of the national development of the country. М. : ICPR RAN, 2013. (In Rus)

10. Russia Arctics: modern paradigm / ed. A. I. Tatarkin. SPb. : Nestor-History, 2014. (In Rus)

11. Cline R.S. World Power Assessment. A Calculus of Strategic Drift. Washington, 1975.

12. Interim National Security Strategic Guidance. The White House, Washington, march, 2021.

13. Diener A. C., Grant A., Bennett M. M. Northeast Asia in regional perspective // Asian Geographer. 2021. Vol. 38. N. 2. P. 95–118. DOI: 10.1080/10225706.2021.1952778.

14. Steinveg B. The role of conferences within Arctic governance // Polar Geography. 2021. Vol. 44. N 1. P. 37–54. DOI: 10.1080/1088937X.2020.1798540.

15. Gricius G. Conceptualising the arctic as a zone of conflict: The winner of the 15th anniversary award // Central European Journal of International and Security Studies. 2021. N 15 (4). P. 4–30. DOI:10.51870/CEJISS.A150401.

16. Johnson B. T. Sensing the Arctic: Situational awareness and the future of northern security // International Journal. 2021. N 76 (3). P. 404–426. DOI: 10.1177/00207020211048424.

17. Lavengood Z. The evolving arctic in the world-system // Journal of World-Systems Research. 2021. N 27 (2). P. 468–493. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5195/jwsr.2021.1042.

18. Morgunova M. The role of the socio-technical regime in the sustainable energy transition: A case of the Eurasian Arctic // Extractive Industries and Society. 2021. N 8 (3). DOI: 10.1016/j.exis.2021.100939.

19. Ramage J., Jungsberg L., Wang S., Westermann S. at al. Population living on permafrost in the Arctic // Population and Environment.2021. N 43 (1). P. 22–38. DOI: 10.1007/s11111-020-00370-6.

20. Raspotnik A., Østhagen A. What about the Arctic? The European Union’s Geopolitical Quest for Northern Space // Geopolitics. 2021. N 26 (4). P. 1150–1174. DOI: 10.1080/14650045.2019.1670643.

21. Samarina V.P., Skufina T.P., Savon D.Yu., Shinkevich A. I. Management of externalities in the context of sustainable development of the russian arctic zone // Sustainability (Switzerland). 2021. N 13 (14). DOI: 10.3390/su13147749.

22. Väätänen V., Zimmerbauer K. Territory — network interplay in the co-constitution of the Arctic and ‘to-be’ Arctic states // Territory, Politics, Governance. 2021. N 8 (3). P. 372–389. DOI: 10.1080/21622671.2018.1559759.

23. Wilson R. E. Analyzing frenemies: An Arctic repertoire of cooperation and rivalry // Political Geography. 76 (2020): 102072. DOI: 10.1016/j.polgeo.2019.102072.

24. Young O.R. Arctic futures — future arctics? // Sustainability (Switzerland). 2021; 13(16):9420. DOI: 10.3390/su13169420.

25. Druzhinin A. G. The Strongholds of Russian Coastal Borderlands: economic dynamics amid geopolitical turbulence // Baltic Region. 2020. N 12 (3). P. 89–104. DOI: 10.5922/2079-8555-2020-3-6.