The Arctic is no longer the quiet, cooperative region it was once assumed to be. Speaking at the Arctic Frontiers conference in Tromsø, security experts warned that the region is increasingly exposed to geopolitical tensions, hybrid threats and renewed great-power rivalry. Professor Gunhild Hoogensen Gjørv, a specialist in security studies and geopolitics at the Arctic University of Norway, told TVP World that while the Arctic has long held strategic importance, the nature of the threats it faces today has fundamentally changed. “In some respects, nothing has changed. And in other respects, everything has changed,” she said. Hoogensen Gjørv cautioned against viewing the Arctic as a single, uniform space. “We have the Russian Arctic, the North American Arctic and the European Arctic,” she said, noting that each is shaped by distinct political, social and security pressures. During the Cold War, the region’s strategic relevance was largely defined by missile trajectories between the Soviet Union and the United States. “The shortest route is still the shortest,” she said, “but now it’s more complicated.” Rather than overt military confrontation, Hoogensen Gjørv identified hybrid threats as a growing concern. These include disinformation campaigns, intelligence-gathering activities and the exploitation of democratic vulnerabilities. “Now it’s more about identifying our weaknesses,” she said, adding that open societies make such vulnerabilities easier to detect and exploit. Technological advances have accelerated these risks. Drones, satellites and even mobile phones can be used to collect information or spread disinformation at scale. “It can be instantaneous,” she warned, describing how millions of devices can be leveraged simultaneously to polarize societies and undermine public trust. Hoogensen Gjørv also addressed concerns surrounding Russia’s so-called shadow fleet, which continues to transport energy resources despite international sanctions. While such activity falls primarily under maritime and legal frameworks, she cautioned that perception plays a critical role. “Hybrid threat activities depend on how we perceive them,” she said, adding that low levels of trust in institutions can magnify their impact. Ultimately, she argued that democratic values and international law remain central to Europe’s security. “This isn’t a lovey-dovey idea,” Hoogensen Gjørv said. “Our security is dependent on democratic systems and a rules-based order.” Whether Europe can muster the political will to defend those principles, she added, remains an open question.
