The struggle for the Arctic is a hybrid conflict

As the ice melts in the Arctic, another threat is growing.

In a new policy brief entitled "Risk of Influence Warfare in the Arctic: Lessons from Greenland", Hans Peder Kirkegaard points out that future conflicts in the region are unlikely to be fought with conventional weapons.

Instead, the battle is increasingly being waged through influence, narratives and digital strategies, with the aim of shaping attitudes and creating division.

Greenland is central to the analysis. Here, foreign actors - both historically and today - can exploit political tensions and identity issues to influence public debate and relations with the outside world. This requires neither troops nor bombs, but knowledge, timing and the right platforms.

The publication’s main point is clear: the risk of armed conflict in the Arctic is low, but influence warfare - where the battle for attention and narratives can have real political significance - is highly likely.

Therefore, security in the Arctic today is not just about defence, but to a large extent also about cooperation, information and the ability to resist external influence.