Arctic experts applauded recent efforts by the United States to bolster its presence in the High North but said that challenges remain to stymie efforts by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and Russia to increase their military leverage in the region. The expert testimony came in March 2026 before a joint meeting of two congressional subcommittees of the House Homeland Security Committee. “The Arctic region is within homeland defense,” said Heather Conley, a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, a Washington, D.C., think tank, according to Stars and Stripes, a U.S. military newspaper. “It’s part of our integrated defense of the Western Hemisphere. The ongoing modernization of our Arctic-based missile defense architecture, as well as developing a persistent presence in the maritime Arctic, with overdue investments in our icebreaker fleet, are critical components of this shift.”
Rep. Carlos Giménez of Florida, who chairs the transportation and maritime security subcommittee, said the stakes in the Arctic are high, but he praised recent policy initiatives such as the billions of dollars dedicated to expanding the U.S. icebreaking fleet and a keener focus on the strategic value of Greenland, an autonomous territory of Denmark. “We must recognize that the Arctic is a challenging but promising frontier, and the competition to dominate it is increasing by the day. The Trump administration is appropriately considering how to leverage strategic vantage points, such as Greenland, to improve U.S. military readiness in the Arctic,” he said, according to published testimony.
Despite its costly war in Ukraine, Russia has built or refurbished dozens of military installations in the region and maintains a large Arctic force, including the Northern Fleet in the Kola Peninsula. The CCP has increased its presence in the High North with multiple dual-use assets and has collaborated more closely with Moscow, especially in commercial use of the Northern Sea Route. The U.S. adversaries also have conducted joint naval and air patrols near the western Arctic in recent years. The threats posed by the CCP and Russia can’t be ignored, Conley said. “If we do not maintain a sustained focus on strengthening America’s Arctic security, we will have failed in our duty to protect the United States,” she said, according to Stars and Stripes.
Canada and Denmark have made major investments in Arctic defense in recent years, bolstering their monitoring systems and maritime presence, Conley said. The U.S. also has made impressive gains in its Arctic defense with $25 billion allocated to increase the nation’s icebreaker fleet from three to 17 in the next decade, said Bryan Clark, a senior fellow and director of the Center for Defense Concepts and Technology at the Hudson Institute, a Washington, D.C., think tank.
But more needs to be done, Clark testified. The U.S. needs to continue to add to its ice-hardened naval capabilities beyond submarines, which are frequently needed elsewhere, he said. Expanding the Army and Marine Corps cold weather fighting abilities also is crucial, he said. Even more important is the need to rapidly manufacture and deploy autonomous and uncrewed systems to defend the vast Arctic maritime domain, including the MQ-9B Reaper medium altitude long endurance (MALE) unmanned aerial system (UAS) to defend against threats and act as monitoring and detection assets. “With a cost per flight hour about one-tenth that of an F-35, MALE UAS would be a sustainable way to expand air defense capacity across America’s Arctic approaches. Because they are modular, the U.S. Air Force could reconfigure MALE UAS to support air surveillance or defense only when needed. In contrast to crewed fighters, UAS operators can remain proficient by using simulators or be contractors who are activated on demand, he said. “New technologies can help. Since the Cold War, robotic and autonomous systems, low Earth orbit and small satellites, and artificial intelligence (AI) have changed modern life and military operations. They can also help solve America’s Arctic dilemma,” Clark testified.
Rep. August Pfluger of Texas, chairman of the counterterrorism and intelligence subcommittee, said while the threats to U.S. interests in the Arctic are real, the challenge will be met. “Today’s Arctic may remain an arena for great power competition for the foreseeable future — but we have a window of opportunity to prevent it from being exploited and weaponized by bad actors,” he said in his opening statement at the March 26 hearing.