... is undoubtedly justified by the logic of forming a workable alternative to Western domination. However, the most important financial, technological and logistical issues are yet to be addressed, to ensure reliable and uninterrupted operation of the NSR and Arctic projects.
Not all the initiatives are fully feasible, or they may take too much time to pan out. For example, the port of Arkhangelsk appears to be the most important “growth point” not only for the Russian Arctic, but for international cooperation ...
... “non-military” activity in the Arctic would help, among other things, to promote the Northern Sea Route as a choice for commercial shipping (by improving the supporting services) and would facilitate negotiations with potential partners that need the NSR for their own purposes (first of all, China).
Return of the “Big Game”
Several publications in the West
have already referred
to the interaction between Russia and NATO in the Arctic as the “Big Game,” which brings up obvious associations with the historical rivalry between Russia and Great Britain in South and Central Asia in the 19th to early 20th centuries. This term probably fits the current conditions but must be interpreted ...
... eliminate all costs associated with obtaining the permission for the NSR use.
The State policy for the long-term development of the Arctic maritime transportation system should be aimed at achieving one goal - to ensure sustainable economic performance of NSR. If the functioning of the Arctic maritime transportation system is profitable, it will be able to produce a synergic effect on the development of related industries (oil and gas production, mining of ore minerals), as well as encourage the development of infrastructure in the ...
