Finland could help the U.S. build a Fleet of Polar Cutters​

By Gonzalo Vázquez

Climate change is gradually turning the Arctic into one of the planet’s most geopolitically relevant maritime regions — the only place where fixed rules of geography are in constant change. The inevitable future ahead for the High North, which will become ice-free during the summer by the mid-2030s, is bound to bring a vast array of commercial and natural resource opportunities for different nations willing to invest in the routes that will open across the region.

The evolution in the High North will change many nations’ geostrategic calculus, transforming the region into another arena for great power competition. But as long as Arctic ice remains, icebreakers are they best way to overcome nature. While Russia and China are well aware, the U.S. is still struggling to build a fleet that can meet its operational requirements over the following decades. Finland, NATO’s newest member, could offer Washington a viable solution to overcome this challenge and expand its fleet of cutters.

Icebreakers for the Arctic

Throughout previous decades, numerous incidents have highlighted the dangers ice poses for ships transiting polar waters, especially cruise ships, cargo ships, and warships. When a vessel is not designed to operate in an environment as challenging as the Arctic, misfortunes will occur. In 2021 and 2022, several ships were stranded along the Northern Sea Route due to the lack of icebreakers escorting them. Such situations could keep worsening during the following years, as activity in the region keeps growing.

Icebreakers are specially designed ships prepared to operate and navigate across polar regions where other ships cannot, and they remain an essential geopolitical instrument to clear trade routes of ice and provide year-round access to the region (both for commercial and security purposes). Russia, with the biggest fleet in the world, is well aware of this. Among the more than 40 vessels it currently operates, a dozen of them are nuclear-powered (the only ones in the world). And more are on their way.

The third unit of the newest Arktika-class icebreaker, the Ural, entered service in late 2022, with four more units to follow by 2028. Additionally, construction is currently underway for the first and only unit of the Leader-class icebreaker, the Rossiya, which will be 209 meters long and weigh close to 70,000 tons. Until the cancellation of the remaining units due to budgetary constraints, it was set to become the largest and most capable class ever built. This impressive quest to build the biggest icebreaker fleet in the world by far, which has been decades in the making, is a massive statement of the importance Moscow attaches to holding control of its Arctic backyard.

China has also increased its regional involvement, with strong aspirations to develop its own Polar Silk Route along the Russian Arctic littorals. Beijing currently has two operational icebreakers — Xue Long 1 and Xue Long 2 — and began construction of a third unit in June 2023 which is said to allow China to send researchers to explore the Arctic seabed. Chinese cutters will help fulfill its regional economic ambitions, supporting mining and energy projects and other infrastructure currently being built. Just as its Russian partner, Beijing is committed to securing its position in the future of Arctic affairs, recently proven by a combined patrol of Chinese and Russian warships close to Alaska in August 2023.

Meanwhile, the world’s top maritime power is struggling to build a fleet of cutters that can satisfy its current operational needs in the High North. The U.S. Coast Guard currently operates the heavy polar icebreaker Polar Star and the medium polar icebreaker Healy, plus an additional heavy polar cutter which has been out of service since 2010. Yet the U.S. Coast Guard’s latest report to Congress stresses the U.S. will “likely need eight to nine new icebreakers” to perform its different, future missions.

Reaching that number of vessels will likely take decades. Plans to build three additional heavy polar cutters with the Polar Security Cutter program will raise the total number to five units. Unfortunately, delivery of the first unit “may now occur no earlier than 2028,” and the 47-year-old Polar Star “is on borrowed time.” Considering this, Washington should seriously consider looking elsewhere to find an alternative.

The “Icebreaker Superpower” can help

Finland, which joined NATO in May 2023 as its 31^st member, is considered to be the most experienced Arctic nation building polar icebreakers, with centuries-long experience. Reportedly, a Finnish shipyard can build and deliver a polar-class icebreaker within 24 months once the contract has been signed. Over the past years, Finland has delivered cutters for South Africa, Australia, Argentina, and even Russia. Moscow has subcontracted several cutters to Finland, including the Project 21900M cutter Murmansk. In October 2022, the Finnish Ministry of Foreign Affairs blocked Helsinki Shipyard’s delivery of a new environmentally-friendly icebreaker to the Russian company Norilsk Nickel. Could Helsinki also “break the ice” for the U.S. Coast Guard?

The option for Washington to buy Finnish-built polar cutters has already been. In 2017, Finnish Consul General in the U.S. Stefan Lindstrom suggested Finland could help the U.S. solve this problem. “The U.S. is now in dire straits about its own icebreaker fleet. They only have two and they are both seriously outdated. We can help,” he said. Lindstrom criticized the seeming fact that U.S. officials were more prone to buy domestic-built cutters at much higher prices rather than Finnish-built ones at around one-fifth of domestic prices. Finland’s most capable polar icebreaker, the LNG-powered Polaris, cost around $150 million, and it took less than two years to build from when its first steel was cut to when it was handed over to the Finnish Transport Agency.

On the contrary, U.S. designers and shipbuilders lack the experience with designing and construction held by their Finnish counterparts. As a result, the U.S. Polar Security Cutter program has experienced an “extended design phase” which will result in a three-year schedule delay and is expected to cost “at least $11.6 billion for acquisition, operations and maintenance”, according to latest reports. For half that price, Finnish shipyards could build an entire fleet of cutters identical to Polaris. The fact that around two thirds of the total number of active icebreakers today have been built or designed by the Nordic “icebreaker superpower” should make a compelling case in and of itself. Finland could help the U.S. build a fleet of decent numbers in less time and at a significantly smaller price compared to current U.S. estimations.

Commercial routes in the High North cannot be cleared of ice without cutters, nor can ships sail through them. By the numbers, Russia is the uncontested leader in the Arctic, with China gradually expanding its presence in the region. If the U.S. wants to uphold an Arctic status quo based on international law, it must show up and stay with its cutters. As the 33^rd Vice Commandant of the U.S. Coast Guard Admiral Steven Poulin argued in a recent interview on the Center for Maritime Strategy’s Maritime Nation podcast, “we need more, we need it faster.” Finland is ready to help — it is up to Washington now.

Gonzalo Vázquez holds a BA in International Relations from the University of Navarre (Spain). He has contributed to the Australian Naval Review, the Spanish Institute for Strategic Studies, and the Arctic Institute.

The views expressed in this piece are the sole opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Center for Maritime Strategy or other institutions listed.