10:00 11.06.2026
The Place of Europe in the Arctic: A View from Italy
© Russian Arctic and Far East Development
Acknowledging Mistakes and the Path to Independence in the ArcticOver the past decade, Europe’s sphere of interest in the Arctic has clearly shifted from scientific research and environmental issues towards geopolitics, energy, and security. An Arctic.ru correspondent listened to what Italian experts had to say about why the Old World, including its southern part, can no longer afford to distance itself from the issue of northern latitudes, and how they see the future of their relations with Russia in the region.
In 2026, Rome presented an official document titled “Italian Policy in the Arctic” which re-invents the republic’s place in the global race to develop the High North.
The speakers at the presentation which was attended by top-ranking state officials noted that when Italy had obtained observer status in the Arctic Council in 2013, it entered a political ecosystem based on the premise that the Arctic was a special region where multilateral cooperation - primarily for scientific purposes - prevailed over international political tensions.
At that stage, Rome defined its presence in the northern latitudes through soft power and scientific diplomacy, recognizing itself as a non-Arctic actor that could nevertheless be useful in certain areas. This approach was based on Italy’s long history of scientific research and research missions, as well as concern over the global environmental agenda.
However, changes in the region have gradually transformed it from a space for international cooperation into an arena of strategic competition. The new document directly links climate transformations with shifts in the balance of power. The melting of ice is now interpreted not only as an environmental issue, but also as a factor opening access to energy resources, mineral extraction, and new supply routes.
In addition, the strategy emphasizes that the Arctic’s role as a contact space between North America and Eurasia makes it a direct area of confrontation between the United States, Russia, and China.
Given the circumstances and building on existing scientific infrastructure and observer status in the Arctic Council, the experts behind the document propose focusing on environmental protection, the economy, and security. The latter is on track to become the key element, since the beginning of the special military operation is described as the key factor behind changes in the regional balance, which expedited the militarization of the Arctic and its integration into the Euro-Atlantic defense architecture.
However, Rome does not consider the option of an autonomous military presence in the Arctic, but is set to participate in collective security within NATO and the EU, providing its capabilities for space-based monitoring of the region. Italy also plans to use its expertise in shipbuilding, defense technologies, and energy.
Thus, Italy, both on its own and as part of the EU, intends to move away in the Arctic from a position of scientific research neutrality.
The Greenland Stumbling Block
Even though the special military operation in Ukraine is presented as the basis for Italy’s shift in Arctic policy in line with the current European agenda, in reality it is only one of the reasons, and likely not the principal one. That much is clearly confirmed by an analysis of publications in leading Italian media presented at the Arctic - Our Common Home forum in Petrozavodsk by independent geopolitical expert and specialist on Eurasian issues Giuseppe Cappelluti.
Mountains on Greenland Island
© RIA Novosti / Ilya Timin
Having studied the frequency and context of references to the Arctic in major left- and right-leaning, state, and independent media outlets over the past 15 years, he concluded that the surge of interest is driven not only by the Russia-Ukraine conflict, but even more so by the return of Donald Trump to the White House and his claims over Greenland.
According to the study, before 2022 media outlets rarely published more than ten Arctic-related articles a year each. These texts mostly dealt with research, environment, culture, and fun facts about life above the Arctic Circle, such as a sports marathon in Yakutia.
After the start of the special military operation, the number of publications increased noticeably in some outlets but declined in others. Only the return of Republicans to power in the United States and their subsequent political course triggered a surge of interest in the Arctic, specifically in geopolitical terms.
“Trump’s victory gave a significant boost to media coverage of the Arctic across the board, whereas the start of the special military operation did so only in specialized publications,” Giuseppe Cappelluti noted.
The context of publications changed as US policy changed, and even assessments of Russia’s presence in the High North in the past year began to be viewed not as a Russia-Europe confrontation, but through the prism of US-Russia relations.
“Since 2022, interest in geopolitics has increased, and a significant portion of materials covered tensions between Russia and the collective West. Publications covered Sweden and Finland’s accession to NATO and military exercises in the Arctic region. However, after Trump’s return to the White House, most articles focused on Greenland and the United States in general. Possible Russia-US cooperation in the Arctic and broader relationship between these two countries have become one of the top themes discussed in the Italian press,” the expert said.
Projection of flags of all countries that took part in the Olympic Torch relay to the North Pole
© RIA Novosti / Alexey Filippov
By contrast, public perception and journalistic coverage of the United States became more cautious after Greenland became part of the international agenda.
“For example, analyzing articles in La Repubblica, which is Italy’s main center-left newspaper, one can see that its stance on Greenland has changed. Before Trump’s victory, the newspaper somewhat supported the idea of Greenland’s independence, but now it openly sides with Denmark,” Giuseppe Cappelluti said.
He noted that Russia, even though it had lost its status as a European partner in the eyes of Italian citizens and the media, is still not regarded as a threat in the Arctic, even in official strategy.
“Unlike the strategies of other Western countries, the Italian Arctic strategy does not refer to Russia as a partner, nor does it refer to it as an enemy. The document leaves the impression that the existing geopolitical tensions in relations remain in a parallel universe,” the expert said.
Acknowledging Mistakes and the Path to Independence in the Arctic
So why is Europe changing its approach to the Arctic, and what role does it see for itself in the Arctic? It aims to become an independent actor that ensures its own needs and security, while remaining a peaceful participant whose voice will be heard in the region, Tommaso Bontempi, international relations expert and researcher of Russian Arctic policy, as well as participant in the Osservatorio Artico project, said.
According to him, for most of its post-war history, Europe has operated on a simple assumption that security could be delegated to alliances, to multilateral institutions, to partners with greater military and logistical capacities. In practice, this meant an almost total dependence on the United States as the guarantor of European interests. It was never a formal agreement, it was real, but it no longer holds.
America’s attempt to take Greenland as a source of resources, disregarding not only Denmark’s interests but also those of Greenlanders themselves, showed that Washington’s Arctic policy follows purely domestic political logic. By extension, US actions in the Strait of Hormuz directly impacted Europe’s energy security, while European opinion was ignored.
Rudolf Island, part of the Franz Josef Land Archipelago in the Barents Sea
© RIA Novosti / Pavel Lvov
“Europe, therefore, finds itself in an uncomfortable position, to say the least. On the one side, an Atlantic ally willing to act unilaterally when its own interests require it. On the other side, Russia, with which Arctic cooperation has a real and documented history, but a politically complicated present. The question is not which of the two to choose. It is acknowledging that Europe can no longer afford to entrust its Arctic presence to the goodwill of either actor,” the expert said at the Arctic - Our Common Home forum.
According to Bontempi, the first response to this challenge will be the development of resource projects and the creation of a European Arctic fleet. He described the idea recently proposed by European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen of creating European icebreakers capable of operating north of the Baltic Sea as a logical pre-condition for any other EU ambitions in the High North.
“Autonomous actor in the Arctic primarily means building up one’s own capabilities. The EU does not have its own icebreaker fleet. And an actor that cannot move independently in the region is not a participant in that region. It is a guest,” the expert said.
From the perspective of energy and industrial security, Bontempi sees prospects in the development of European projects in Greenland, which holds some of the largest reserves of critical raw materials in the Western Hemisphere.
Nuuk town on Greenland Island
© RIA Novosti / Ilya Timin
According to the European Commission, the EU currently covers 95 percent of its demand for rare earth materials through imports, while China controls around 60 percent of the global output and up to 90 percent of the manufacturing capacity. Europe found itself caught between China’s monopoly over processing chains and American appetite for Greenland’s raw materials, and needs to find a way out of this situation.
“Washington has allocated $120 million recently to fund a mining project at Tanbreez, southern Greenland. Therefore, developing an autonomous European capacity for extraction and transformation in partnership with Nuuk should be an industrial and strategic priority that admits no further delay,” Bontempi said.
With regard to relations with Russia in the Arctic, the expert suggests basing them on pragmatism and the interests of the parties in the region. According to him, where today political trust is limited, spaces for technical and industrial interaction remain open. That includes safety standards for Arctic navigation, shared emergency management, protection of the marine ecosystems.
“On the Arctic ice, cooperation worked, because geography imposes its own priority in the Arctic, regardless of the temperature of diplomatic relations,” he said.
Bontempi acknowledges that Russia has been present in the Arctic for centuries. Its presence is physical, institutional, and cultural in ways that Europe cannot and does not claim to match. What Europe is claiming is simply the right to be a serious interlocutor in a region that affects its own security, its own energy supply and its own economic future.
“A Europe that is capable in the Arctic is not a threat to anyone. It is a more reliable partner, a more predictable actor, and a more useful participant in the governance of a region that belongs, in different ways, and to different degrees, to all of us. That, I think, is what a common home requires. Not the absence of distinct interests, but the willingness to pursue them openly and to negotiate where they meet,” the expert said in closing.
