If Trump succeeds with his Golden Dome shield, it could trigger an "extremely dangerous situation."

The expiration of the New START treaty between the U.S. and Russia has caused concern in the Norwegian government, as stated by Norwegian Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Støre at a major Arctic conference in Tromsø last week.

The comment was made to The Barents Observer, which reported that the so-called New START agreement between the U.S. and Russia expired.

Read also: The last nuclear arms control treaty has now expired. But that doesn’t necessarily mean a new arms race (https://www.dr.dk/nyheder/udland/nu-udloeber-den-sidste-aftale-om-kontrol-af-atomvaaben-men-det-betyder-ikke-noedvendigvis-nyt)

This means the end of mutual inspections and data exchanges between the two countries, as well as the removal of a cap on the number of nuclear warheads Russia and the U.S. may hold in their arsenals.

Katarzyna Zysk, a professor at the Norwegian Defense University’s Institute for Defense Studies in Oslo and a guest researcher at Boston University, told The Barents Observer that the treaty created a crucial predictability by allowing the two nations to exchange data and conduct mutual inspections of their nuclear arsenals.

Zysk’s research includes Russia’s military strategy, nuclear deterrence, and broader Arctic security policy.

She elaborates to DR that when this predictability disappears, uncertainty increases—specifically whether an adversary might expand its nuclear arsenal now that there is no longer a cap.

“I believe that uncertainty about the direction the other party chooses can lead to a worst-case scenario assumption. This could potentially create an incentive to increase the arsenal,” she says.

However, this does not mean we will see an immediate change. Russia’s war in Ukraine is straining its economy, so even though modernizing the country’s nuclear program is a priority for Russia, it is limited in its ability to expand it, explains Katarzyna Zysk.

“The low-hanging fruit in this situation is increasing the number of warheads, but the question is how low that fruit actually hangs and how quickly Russia can do it. Some say it will take years,” she states.

---

**Can Russia Afford a New Arms Race?**

---

Russia’s nuclear forces are more vulnerable and of lower quality than those of the U.S., according to Tormod Heier, a professor of military strategy and operations at the Norwegian Defense University’s Institute for Defense Studies in Oslo and a guest researcher at Boston University.

Given that Russia is militarily inferior to the U.S. and NATO, its preferred weapons system will be submarines capable of launching hypersonic missiles with nuclear or conventional warheads.

This weakness compared to the U.S. might be something that could push Putin to compensate by ordering more nuclear weapons, Heier suggests, but he also notes:

“It will be extremely costly for Russia. The Kremlin already faces enormous economic expenses due to the war in Ukraine. A new arms race would therefore only worsen the economic problems they already have,” says Tormod Heier in a written response to DR.

Norway is located very close to one of Russia’s key submarine bases in the Litsafjorden. In fact, it’s just about two hours’ drive from the base to Kirkenes in Norway.

The image here is from the Norwegian exercise Arctic Dolphin on the Norwegian West Coast. The exercise is an annual maritime drill focusing on, among other things, submarine hunting. (Photo: © Edward Valentin Coates / Forsvaret)

Because the submarines must pass through the Barents Sea and along the Norwegian coast in Finnmark to reach the Atlantic, Norway’s intelligence services, Navy, and Air Force have had a relatively good ability to monitor them, explains Tormod Heier.

“Both the U.S. and NATO have strengthened their presence just outside the door to these submarines, making it even harder for them to slip out of the Barents Sea and hide in deep waters,” writes Tormod Heier to DR and elaborates:

“I believe Trump will continue where he left off in the previous presidential term. He then pursued a strategy focused on unpredictability and advanced operations closer to Russian nuclear submarines, including near the Bear Island Passage.”

The Bear Island Passage lies between Svalbard and Hammerfest.

---

**Proceed with Caution**

---

From NATO’s perspective, there is currently a push to plan an Arctic sentinel mission called ’Arctic Sentry.’

Read also: New NATO mission aims to deter adversaries in the Arctic and ease Trump’s appetite for Greenland, correspondent assesses (https://www.dr.dk/nyheder/udland/ny-nato-mission-skal-afskraekke-fjender-i-arktis-og-mildne-trumps-sult-paa-groenland)

At a press conference on Wednesday, Secretary General Mark Rutte kept details close to his chest regarding what the mission will actually entail. However, it will include Denmark’s defense exercise in Greenland, ’Arctic Endurance,’ and Norway’s exercise ’Cold Response,’ which will operate under NATO’s umbrella.

At the press conference, Rutte further stated that the NATO move seen with ’Arctic Sentry’ comes in light of “Russia’s increased military activities and China’s growing interest in the High North.”

NATO’s Secretary General, Mark Rutte, held a press conference on Wednesday ahead of the alliance’s defense minister meeting today, Thursday. (Photo: © Tom Nicholson, Reuters/Ritzau Scanpix)

NATO must be extremely cautious about how it plays its military cards in the Arctic.

That’s the view of Peter Viggo Jakobsen, a lecturer at the Institute for Strategy and Military Studies at the Danish Defense Academy.

“A snake with nuclear weapons is a very dangerous predator, so you have to think about how hard you want to push it into a corner,” says Peter Viggo Jakobsen.

He acknowledges that it is worrying that the rules that have provided good protection against aggression from major powers are now weakened with the expiration of the nuclear arms control treaty.

“But it’s not like this changes the threat assessment from one day to the next,” he says.

That’s why it’s also important that NATO carefully chooses its presence in the Arctic and doesn’t rush into aggressively patrolling the area between Svalbard and Hammerfest at the Bear Island Passage. It’s precisely here that the U.S. has been very active in the past, notes Peter Viggo Jakobsen.

“The U.S. wants to be there and stay there, but the question is whether NATO as an alliance should also do that, or if we should focus on the straits further down,” he says, referring to the line between Greenland, Iceland, and the United Kingdom.

“If you think about it from the perspective of pushing a snake into a corner so it can’t get out, it sometimes bites back. A snake with nuclear weapons is a very dangerous predator, so you have to think about how hard you want to push it into a corner,” says Peter Viggo Jakobsen.

---

**Protection Against Nuclear Weapons**

---

Returning to the New START treaty, Peter Viggo Jakobsen points out that it’s not the rules of the treaty themselves that prevent nuclear attacks. Instead, it’s the ability to protect one’s own weapons so they can’t be eliminated by a surprise attack.

“What creates stability in the nuclear world is the knowledge that Russia, the U.S., and China have that even if they fire first with nuclear weapons, the adversary they attack will still have enough nuclear bombs left to retaliate with nuclear weapons,” says Peter Viggo Jakobsen.

This mutual deterrence mechanism is vital for protection against nuclear weapons, he explains. That’s why it’s important that no imbalance arises in terms of the deterrence that superpowers exercise against each other.

“It’s not just the Russians who are a problem in a world viewed from a Norwegian or Danish perspective. It’s also the Americans,” he says.

“Imagine a situation where Donald Trump’s Golden Dome succeeds, allowing Donald Trump to repel possible Russian and Chinese attacks while also being able to attack Russia and China. This would become an extremely dangerous situation where the U.S. could be very tempted to use nuclear weapons,” believes Peter Viggo Jakobsen.

Read also: Why Trump thinks Greenland is the ideal home for his 'Golden Dome' (https://www.dr.dk/nyheder/indland/groenland/derfor-mener-trump-groenland-er-det-optimale-hjem-hans-golden-dome)

---

**Should Stay Away from the Bear Island Passage**

---

On Wednesday, Denmark’s Defense Minister Troels Lund Poulsen (V) said he expects many European countries to be willing to participate in NATO’s Arctic sentinel mission.

He further stated that it will also require a significant contribution from Denmark.

How that contribution will concretely look remains unclear, but discussions are underway, says the Defense Minister on Thursday.

He also refers to the fact that it will be the Chief of Defense, Michael Hyldgaard, who will provide a military expert recommendation regarding the Danish contribution. According to Troels Lund Poulsen, it will be a “substantially large contribution.”

“It will involve several different capacities, both in terms of aircraft, dedicated military personnel, and most likely also things related to being present at sea. I expect contributions from all three branches,” says the Defense Minister.

According to Peter Viggo, the recommendation is that NATO should stay away from the Bear Island Passage.

“The funny thing is that if you go back and look at the American analyses from the late 1980s, when the Americans positioned themselves right up to the Bear Island Passage and pushed very hard, they now admit that it was a mistake and extremely risky. And that’s still the position I’m on,” he says.

You can read much more in our live blog here (https://www.dr.dk/nyheder/indland/groenland/live-storpolitisk-drama-mellem-usa-danmark-og-groenland).

Warning: This article was translated by a Large Language Model, in case of doubt, you can always visit the original source.