Stalled Melting of Northern Polar Ice Buys the West Time to Strengthen Arctic Capabilities

One of my greatest interests is the visibility of predicted climate change in the surface area of northern sea ice. Therefore, dear readers, allow me to return once again to this topic, as I have not reported on it for some time in this English-language blog.

According to the August statistics, the average surface area of northern sea ice last August was the seventh smallest in its recorded history, which began in 1979. This was because, over the past year, the ice cover was larger than in August of 2024, 2020, 2019, 2016, 2012, and 2007.

This fact fits well with the already established picture that northern sea ice shrank rapidly from the 1990s until 2007, after which its surface area has shown nothing more than random variation. This reality is also illustrated in the figure I have drawn below, where the X-axis shows the ice area in millions of square kilometers and the Y-axis shows the years.

The maximum extent of Arctic sea ice is usually reached in September, so later this month we will see whether the amount of navigable, ice-free water in the Arctic Ocean exceeds that of previous years. Based on the above statistics, this does not seem likely—but neither does it seem entirely impossible.

The size of northern sea ice naturally has its own scientific significance, particularly in the context of the threat of climate change. In addition, it carries major practical geopolitical importance, since during President Trump’s administration the United States has observed that Russia is clearly ahead of others in this respect.

In this sense, the slowdown of ice melting is very good news for the free Western world, as it gives the U.S. and other nations interested in northern maritime regions more time to build up their own capacities for operating in the Arctic. At the same time, this particularly benefits my home country of Finland, which is indisputably the world leader in building icebreakers and stands ready to offer its expertise to other nations as well.

Previous thought on the same topic:

Big Deal in the Cold North: Finland vs. Canada
Northern Sea Ice Area Has Not Responded to Exceptionally High Temperatures
Ice Sheet Losses in Antarctica and Greenland

Big Deal in the Cold North: Finland vs. Canada

The past winter was exceptionally warm in Northern Europe – according to a recent study, it was even the warmest in at least 2,000 years. That’s why it is interesting that in April, the extent of Arctic sea ice was only the ninth smallest in recorded history (see figure).

This was the case despite the fact that in March, the sea ice area in the north was the smallest since satellite records began in 1979, and April was also warmer than usual in Finland. It remains to be seen whether the Arctic Ocean will melt enough by autumn for the sea routes passing through it to gain renewed attention.

This is also tied to the fact that Finnish and Canadian shipbuilders are competing to sell icebreakers to the United States. In this respect, the Finns have a clear advantage, as only Finland currently has the capacity to build the 40 icebreakers that the U.S. needs – which may be the reason why Canada has offered the U.S. the possibility of building Canadian-designed icebreakers on U.S. soil.

However, in this context, one might imagine that the U.S. would take note of the fact that even the Canadians have just ordered an icebreaker from Finland. And so, to play it safe, they might place their order with Finland as well.

On the other hand, it is clear that 40 icebreakers cannot be built in a year or two, and for that reason, the Americans might well split the order between the competing parties. It remains to be seen how this competition will play out – or whether the entire Arctic will melt to the point that, in three years' time, there will be little to no need for icebreakers in the Arctic Ocean at all.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Northern Sea Ice Area Has Not Responded to Exceptionally High Temperatures
Ice Sheet Losses in Antarctica and Greenland
Russia Pays the Price for Its Foolishness

Finland and the USA: Strong Allies with Shared Interests or a Trade Dispute?

Finland has always had excellent relations with the USA. As a sign of this, President Alexander Stubb has refrained from criticizing Donald Trump’s administration and has instead sought to understand its actions—even to the extent that some have speculated he is overly deferential to it.

There is, of course, an excellent explanation for Stubb’s and Finland’s approach: as a neighbor of Russia—and following the era of Finlandization, when the country had to be cautious in its dealings with the Soviet Union—Finland is now heavily dependent on NATO and, consequently, the USA to guarantee its military security. Nevertheless, Finland will remain a state governed by the rule of law, firmly committed to defending the inviolability of national borders against all major powers. This applies to Denmark as well.

In this context, it is extremely unfortunate that President Trump is threatening the EU—and, by extension, Finland—with trade tariffs that would hinder transatlantic commerce. Such measures would be particularly harmful to open economies like Finland’s, whose prosperity relies heavily on foreign trade. It would not be beneficial for the United States either, as it could negatively impact the very positive attitude that Finns generally have toward Americans.

It remains to be seen whether Trump and his administration understand this and seek to balance trade between the USA and the EU through other means. Moreover, in the end, high US tariffs would be paid by ordinary American voters, which is unlikely to increase Trump’s popularity in his own country.

After all, there are plenty of people in the US who struggle to cover their daily expenses. And they certainly did not vote for Trump so that he would plunge their personal finances into even greater hardship.

* * *

Finally, I would like to share a message with my American readers from my country’s Minister for Foreign Trade, Wille Rydman (Finns Party). At the end of last week, he made the following remarks:

"The United States has been focused on utilizing Alaska’s mineral resources. Here, Finland’s world-class geological expertise can offer significant contributions. The U.S. plans for Alaska have also emphasized the development of basic infrastructure, particularly in telecommunications, an area where Finland has strong capabilities."

"The U.S. has also prioritized improving its situational awareness in the Arctic. There is room for development in sensor technology, measurement and monitoring systems, and the utilization of space technology. Finland has expertise in all these fields."

"We are working to open markets through ICE Pact cooperation, which could allow Finnish shipyards to contribute their capacity to icebreaker construction. North America faces a shortage of shipbuilding capacity, making this a fantastic opportunity for our shipyards... We have the knowledge and capability to build the best icebreakers quickly and at a competitive price. Finnish maritime industry companies have supplied icebreaking technology for the most powerful polar icebreakers, Baltic Sea escort icebreakers, as well as smaller river and port icebreakers. Our expertise is extensive, and the industry operates on a global scale."

I sincerely hope that these considerations reach President Trump’s administration and encourage it to foster cooperation between Finland and the EU—natural allies of the United States—rather than risk a trade war that would harm all parties involved.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Trump’s Tariff Weapon Worked, but Will Finland’s Development Aid Strategy Succeed?
Putin, Trump, and the Prospect of Peace
Greenland's Future: A Battleground of Global Powers?

Russia Pays the Price for Its Foolishness

Vladimir Putin's Russia has intended to make the Northern Sea Route, which runs along the northern coast of Asia and through Russian-controlled waters, a major shipping lane. Behind this plan is not only the economic benefit for Russia but also the assumption that the shrinking of Arctic sea ice would make the route more navigable.

However, the volume of this shipping traffic is expected to fall to almost half of what was planned, leading Russia's state nuclear energy corporation, Rosatom, to sharply lower its forecast for the amount of cargo traffic on the Northern Sea Route by 2031.

This follows Putin's directive that at least 80 million tons of cargo should pass through the route this year and 200 million tons by 2031. In reality, the volume of cargo traffic is expected to reach only about half of the planned figures.

Another reason is that the Arctic sea ice has not melted as predicted since 2013, when it was at its lowest extent in recorded history. As a result, regular traffic is only feasible in the western part of the Northern Sea Route, because the ice conditions in the eastern part, east of the Gulf of Ob, are more difficult and require continuous support from heavy icebreakers.

It may well be that Russia's next step to increase the use of the Northern Sea Route will be to expand its icebreaker fleet. However, this requires both time and money, the latter of which is being spent every single day in Ukraine, where Russia's army invaded due to President Putin's megalomania.

It is therefore quite possible that the Northern Sea Route will not become a major shipping artery for a long time, and Russia will not be able to boost its economy through it. This proves the old saying that stupidity has a price. Putin´s stupidity.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Reevaluating Arctic Sea Ice Melt: A Closer Look at Trends and Predictions
Medieval trade ranged from North America to Ukraine
A new route for the Ukrainian crops

Finland Will Thrive with Any US President, Trump Survived the Assassination Attempt

The President of Finland, Alexander Stubb, was interviewed on the Fox channel, which aligns with the US Republicans. However, he did not comment on the relative merits of the presidential candidates but stated that regardless of who leads the United States, Finland will get along with him.

Stubb also noted with satisfaction that an increasing number of NATO member countries have invested the agreed two percent of their GDP in defense. He gave credit for this to the former US president who brought up the issue at the time.

Instead of addressing specific issues, he mentioned that the political discourse in the US has become toxic, and he does not want the free world to emulate it. This can also be interpreted as a comment on Finland's domestic political debate, which also has become unnecessarily polarized in recent years.

He also suggested that the US and Finland could deepen their defense cooperation, for example, in the field of icebreakers, as 80 percent of the world's icebreakers are designed and 60 percent are manufactured in Finland. However, it remains to be seen whether the Pentagon will take up this offer.

Overall, I was quite skeptical of Alexander Stubb's ability to serve as president after he was elected. Therefore, I am very pleased to see that, in my view, he has performed his duties very well thus far, as also evidenced by the interview seen on Fox.

One can only hope that this continues in the future. And that the US also gets a political leader in the upcoming elections who exceeds the expectations of the voters.

* * *

At the same time, the presidential race in the United States is intensifying. The latest development was an assassination attempt on a candidate, resulting in the death of one likely Donald Trump voter, as well as the shooter. Additionally, at least two people were seriously injured.

However, it is likely that Trump's support among voters has rather increased than decreased as a result of the assassination attempt, given that Trump himself sustained a minor injury. This is partly because, during the heated campaign, some Democrats have carelessly expressed wishes for violence against Trump - a fact his supporters are not shy to highlight.

The incident is also serious in terms of freedom of speech. The central question is whether last night's shooting would have occurred without the Democrats' violent rhetoric. Or were those statements ultimately irrelevant, with the shooter's motive emerging from "ordinary" political discourse, which is, in any case, extremely polarized in the United States.

We will never get a definitive answer to these questions, as the shooter is not here to tell. And this will not change, no matter how much the background of the incident is analyzed by any group of political commentators.

Previous thoughts on the same topic:
Ukraine can and will stop Putin
Finns want a border law
Biden's dementia and Trump's speeches may improve European security