What do you think?
Polar War: Submarines, Spies, and the Struggle for Power in a Melting Arctic
Russian spies. Sabotaged pipelines. Undersea communications severed in the dead of night.
Tensions are building at the top of the world and the Arctic - the fastest-warming place on Earth - stands at the crossroads of geopolitical ambition and environmental catastrophe. As thawing ice opens up new trade routes, untapped natural resources and long-frozen biological weapons, award-winning commentator Kenneth R. Rosen draws on first-hand reportage and testimony to document the race to control this strategically crucial territory. Can America, which since the 1990s has lagged behind on infrastructure, reimpose its might against the superior technology and strategic engagement of Russia and China? Above the Arctic Circle, the world's superpowers stand on the brink of a new cold war - and every day it grows hotter.
Timely and incisive, Polar War is an indispensable account of the interests, landscapes and people that define the world's most extreme frontier
Tensions are building at the top of the world and the Arctic - the fastest-warming place on Earth - stands at the crossroads of geopolitical ambition and environmental catastrophe. As thawing ice opens up new trade routes, untapped natural resources and long-frozen biological weapons, award-winning commentator Kenneth R. Rosen draws on first-hand reportage and testimony to document the race to control this strategically crucial territory. Can America, which since the 1990s has lagged behind on infrastructure, reimpose its might against the superior technology and strategic engagement of Russia and China? Above the Arctic Circle, the world's superpowers stand on the brink of a new cold war - and every day it grows hotter.
Timely and incisive, Polar War is an indispensable account of the interests, landscapes and people that define the world's most extreme frontier
Audible Audio
Published January 22, 2026
About the author
Kenneth R. Rosen
4 books47 followersKenneth R. Rosen has written for the New Yorker, the New York Times Magazine, VQR, and the Atlantic. He spent seven years at the New York Times, his hometown newspaper, and now divides his time between northern Italy and Massachusetts.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 79 reviews
April 22, 2026
Eh. I really liked the author when he appeared on the Rest is Politics. Super intelligent, knows his stuff. But this book feels a bit aimless… commendable for breadth, lacking in structure.
As an aside, it gets a two star as audiobook version on Spotify was truly horrific. The voice over is the worst i’ve ever heard. I can’t believe someone approved that reader. Seriously, the author should have just read it, his voice is much better. Even Kermit the Frog’s voice would have been better.
As an aside, it gets a two star as audiobook version on Spotify was truly horrific. The voice over is the worst i’ve ever heard. I can’t believe someone approved that reader. Seriously, the author should have just read it, his voice is much better. Even Kermit the Frog’s voice would have been better.
February 23, 2026
I was expecting a bog standard geopolitics book about the Arctic, but that is not what you will find here. Instead, Rosen has put together a peculiar hodge-podge of travel writing, investigative journalism, poetry, and yes, geopolitics.
First of all, I have to hand it to the author for taking two years out of his schedule to actually visit and travel around the region.There's such a wide array of stories from the Arctic that Rosen brings to life. We hear from a rogue's gallery of groups with a connection to the Arctic: US Special Forces training in Alaska, Inuits of Greenland, climate scientists, Norweigian border control guards, a multicultural community of artists living in Spitsbergen, suicide prevention groups in forgotten military outposts, US Coast Guard contingents traversing the Aleutian Islands, escapees crossing the Bering Strait to escape the Russo-Ukraine War.
However, this may also be the book's downfall. As much as I enjoyed these sketches, spanning the USA, Canada, Denmark, Russia, Sweden, Iceland, and Norway, I felt that an overarching narrative was lacking. This does not make it a bad book, though I do think the title and subtitle of the book are misleading, and promise a different experience to the one that you get.
Saying that, I learnt a lot from this book and, for the most part, found it an engaging read. The predominant message that reverberates across the pages is that Russia is far ahead of Europe and the United States in its power projection capabilities in the Arctic, and unless something changes, looks to be the great winner in the region as the Arctic melts.
A sense of tragedy bleeds into Rosen's writing. This is a dark, pessimistic, sad book. It seems inevitable (if not already a reality) that the region will become caught up in a new geopolitical power struggle, the ice caps will continue to melt, its melting will be weaponised, the concerns of the indigenous Arctic populations will continue to be trampled, new trade routes will be forged through the ice, we will fight over the vast natural resources under'th, the planet will warm as the permafrost thaws and releases untold quantities of carbon and methane into the atmosphere. As Rosen laments, the Arctic ('arktos' meaning bear in Greek) will become only an honorary title, containing no polar bears once the Arctic Ocean becomes ice-free by summer 2050.
First of all, I have to hand it to the author for taking two years out of his schedule to actually visit and travel around the region.There's such a wide array of stories from the Arctic that Rosen brings to life. We hear from a rogue's gallery of groups with a connection to the Arctic: US Special Forces training in Alaska, Inuits of Greenland, climate scientists, Norweigian border control guards, a multicultural community of artists living in Spitsbergen, suicide prevention groups in forgotten military outposts, US Coast Guard contingents traversing the Aleutian Islands, escapees crossing the Bering Strait to escape the Russo-Ukraine War.
However, this may also be the book's downfall. As much as I enjoyed these sketches, spanning the USA, Canada, Denmark, Russia, Sweden, Iceland, and Norway, I felt that an overarching narrative was lacking. This does not make it a bad book, though I do think the title and subtitle of the book are misleading, and promise a different experience to the one that you get.
Saying that, I learnt a lot from this book and, for the most part, found it an engaging read. The predominant message that reverberates across the pages is that Russia is far ahead of Europe and the United States in its power projection capabilities in the Arctic, and unless something changes, looks to be the great winner in the region as the Arctic melts.
A sense of tragedy bleeds into Rosen's writing. This is a dark, pessimistic, sad book. It seems inevitable (if not already a reality) that the region will become caught up in a new geopolitical power struggle, the ice caps will continue to melt, its melting will be weaponised, the concerns of the indigenous Arctic populations will continue to be trampled, new trade routes will be forged through the ice, we will fight over the vast natural resources under'th, the planet will warm as the permafrost thaws and releases untold quantities of carbon and methane into the atmosphere. As Rosen laments, the Arctic ('arktos' meaning bear in Greek) will become only an honorary title, containing no polar bears once the Arctic Ocean becomes ice-free by summer 2050.
February 3, 2026
Rosen has clearly done his research! It is clear that in this current geopolitical climate the US is not equipped to operate successfully in the Arctic.
Very topical and ironic considering Trump’s lust for Greenland.
I am left thinking perhaps Russia wants a war in the Arctic as they are so much more prepared. Definitely food for thought.
The 3 stars comes from my inability to enjoy the read of this book. I felt Rosen could have written this better as often it felt very jumpy without a clear structure.
That being said, if you want to learn Arctic geopolitics then this is the book for you.
Very topical and ironic considering Trump’s lust for Greenland.
I am left thinking perhaps Russia wants a war in the Arctic as they are so much more prepared. Definitely food for thought.
The 3 stars comes from my inability to enjoy the read of this book. I felt Rosen could have written this better as often it felt very jumpy without a clear structure.
That being said, if you want to learn Arctic geopolitics then this is the book for you.
March 3, 2026
elaborating more than usual bc two of my loyal and faithful goodreads friends marked this as “want to read” after i updated on it (hi tristan and dante)
rosen offers some really great—and timely—insights into the Arctic. unfortunately, reading this was like panning for gold in a stream of overwritten word sludge. light is always “yawning,” national interests “dovetailing.” anecdotes are endless and narrative-serving descriptions are overly tedious.
in the last chap he writes “Aphoristic euphemisms and symbols from my arctic dreaming stick with me.” no fucking joke! way too many of those aphorisms euphemisms and symbols made it into this book. a better editor would have purged abt a third of this book (plus a number of typos i encountered). i can only imagine it was quite rushed bc of its timeliness.
not to say there’s not some (if not many) moments where the prose style actually elevates what would have otherwise been stale explanations of operations and logistics. but gee i was rolling my eyes a lot.
appendix (basically just an overarching policy proposal) is excellent.
rosen offers some really great—and timely—insights into the Arctic. unfortunately, reading this was like panning for gold in a stream of overwritten word sludge. light is always “yawning,” national interests “dovetailing.” anecdotes are endless and narrative-serving descriptions are overly tedious.
in the last chap he writes “Aphoristic euphemisms and symbols from my arctic dreaming stick with me.” no fucking joke! way too many of those aphorisms euphemisms and symbols made it into this book. a better editor would have purged abt a third of this book (plus a number of typos i encountered). i can only imagine it was quite rushed bc of its timeliness.
not to say there’s not some (if not many) moments where the prose style actually elevates what would have otherwise been stale explanations of operations and logistics. but gee i was rolling my eyes a lot.
appendix (basically just an overarching policy proposal) is excellent.
February 15, 2026
I have finished reading “Polar War: Submarines, Spies and the Struggle for Power in a Melting Arctic” by Kenneth R. Rosen.
The Trump Administration’s recent unsubtle efforts to gain control of Greenland has focused international attention back to the issue of security in the Arctic.
The main points the author makes is that the Arctic is melting and as it melts, efforts to militarise it and extract resources from it are increasing. The US only recently realising this was an issue means that it’s means to defend it’s own Arctic interests there are far behind it’s ambitions. Meanwhile, Russia has been reactivating Cold War bases within the Arctic Circle and creating new infrastructure for years before. At the same time other powers not directly in contact with the Arctic, such as Turkey and China, have started to play their hand in the region more noticeably every year.
The geopolitics of the Arctic in recent years and presently were talked about in this book, but all too often they seemed buried in a narrative that seemed melancholy, overly descriptive and self-indulgent on the part of the author. I don’t mind writers being moved by their experiences, but for some reason I found the meandering parts of this book not to my taste.
I found that my main problem with this book is the overly flowery language used in many places. I felt a bit too much like the author was tying to write like this was a work of fiction. If executed well enough authors can get away with it, as long as it moves things along. Authors like Robert K Massie made careers out of epic narrative histories that moved as much as they informed. But for myself I felt all too often GTTFP Syndrome (Get To The F***ing Point). In certain places I gave the author some slack with this, since I think I would be emotionally moved too if I saw half of the environmental destruction he has seen. But all too often the author’s prose seem to get in the way of the flow of the narrative and made reading this seem like a chore.
Aside from the narrative issues mentioned above, I can credit this book for at least publicising a region where arguably multiple sleeper conflicts have the potential to detonate. There seemed times where the author seemed to suggest that the US would be better off burying their support for Ukraine to pursue Arctic scientific cooperation with Russia, but he never quite goes that far. In fact, position taking is very rare in this book, which would bother me less if more focus was put on geopolitical analysis and less on spinning a moody yarn. Furthermore, while I appreciate the author is from Alaska, the American-centric look on the territorial tensions in this region did grate after a while. I would have preferred to know more about NATO and EU initiatives to help address Arctic Security.
The Trump Administration’s recent unsubtle efforts to gain control of Greenland has focused international attention back to the issue of security in the Arctic.
The main points the author makes is that the Arctic is melting and as it melts, efforts to militarise it and extract resources from it are increasing. The US only recently realising this was an issue means that it’s means to defend it’s own Arctic interests there are far behind it’s ambitions. Meanwhile, Russia has been reactivating Cold War bases within the Arctic Circle and creating new infrastructure for years before. At the same time other powers not directly in contact with the Arctic, such as Turkey and China, have started to play their hand in the region more noticeably every year.
The geopolitics of the Arctic in recent years and presently were talked about in this book, but all too often they seemed buried in a narrative that seemed melancholy, overly descriptive and self-indulgent on the part of the author. I don’t mind writers being moved by their experiences, but for some reason I found the meandering parts of this book not to my taste.
I found that my main problem with this book is the overly flowery language used in many places. I felt a bit too much like the author was tying to write like this was a work of fiction. If executed well enough authors can get away with it, as long as it moves things along. Authors like Robert K Massie made careers out of epic narrative histories that moved as much as they informed. But for myself I felt all too often GTTFP Syndrome (Get To The F***ing Point). In certain places I gave the author some slack with this, since I think I would be emotionally moved too if I saw half of the environmental destruction he has seen. But all too often the author’s prose seem to get in the way of the flow of the narrative and made reading this seem like a chore.
Aside from the narrative issues mentioned above, I can credit this book for at least publicising a region where arguably multiple sleeper conflicts have the potential to detonate. There seemed times where the author seemed to suggest that the US would be better off burying their support for Ukraine to pursue Arctic scientific cooperation with Russia, but he never quite goes that far. In fact, position taking is very rare in this book, which would bother me less if more focus was put on geopolitical analysis and less on spinning a moody yarn. Furthermore, while I appreciate the author is from Alaska, the American-centric look on the territorial tensions in this region did grate after a while. I would have preferred to know more about NATO and EU initiatives to help address Arctic Security.
April 6, 2026
Very unclear. The important points were not clearly explained, but lots of unimportant information was added. Disappointed because it could have been a great book because the author visited all the articles countries.
1. Russia is the kind of the Arctic. They have the most ice breakers and a long coast time at the Arctic.
2. China is staking claims about natural resources with its dual- use boats, doing dual-use stuff.
3. The Nordic countries have increased their defence budget, reintroduced drafting, and training American groups for Arctic warfare. Like sweats freeze and can kill you; fuel freeze so you need antifreeze.
4. Greenland has always hosted American bases so really no need to take over it. It is supported by Denmark as global warming happens and the traditional economy is going under.
5. America has no ice breakers. The Arctic Angels are the troopers stationed in Alaska. Morale is low and suicide amongst troopers high.
6. There used to be more scientific and rescue collaboration with Russia, but that has stopped.
1. Russia is the kind of the Arctic. They have the most ice breakers and a long coast time at the Arctic.
2. China is staking claims about natural resources with its dual- use boats, doing dual-use stuff.
3. The Nordic countries have increased their defence budget, reintroduced drafting, and training American groups for Arctic warfare. Like sweats freeze and can kill you; fuel freeze so you need antifreeze.
4. Greenland has always hosted American bases so really no need to take over it. It is supported by Denmark as global warming happens and the traditional economy is going under.
5. America has no ice breakers. The Arctic Angels are the troopers stationed in Alaska. Morale is low and suicide amongst troopers high.
6. There used to be more scientific and rescue collaboration with Russia, but that has stopped.
May 9, 2026
overall, i enjoyed this and feel like i learned some new things about militarization in the arctic. however, this book is kind of structurally all over the place, and at the same time repeats facts and arguments often. i don’t know how many times i read that alaska is over twice the size of texas but i guess it’s burned into my brain now. i almost felt that each chapter of this book, treated individually, was a pretty successful essay, but together became less compelling due to the structural issues.
i enjoyed the writing itself. there are also some sentence level bangers in here — like “what is deterrence if not passive aggression?” nice.
i enjoyed the writing itself. there are also some sentence level bangers in here — like “what is deterrence if not passive aggression?” nice.
June 5, 2026
Byłoby 4, gdyby autor tak pięknie nie ominął sporej Kanady. Alaska dostała prawie połowę książki. Sporo o Europie i Grenlandii (choć o Kirunie można napisać więcej). O Kanadzie dosłownie wspomniano przy pożarach lasów.
April 27, 2026
A great look at the geopolitical situation in a region of increasing interest.
August 11, 2026
Mijn interview met Kenneth Rosen in EW: https://www.ewmagazine.nl/buitenland/...
Review of advance copy received from Netgalley
ARC
I'd like to thank Simon & Schuster and NetGalley for giving me the opportunity to read "Polar War" early in return for an honest review.
Finding the intersections between climate change and global tensions within the arctic is a vastly interesting topic. This book takes an examination at the relations between the two, highlighting the author's personal experiences and historic examples of tensions in the area. As intriguing as this topic is, Rosen, unfortunately, tells it in a very dry, matter-of-fact way, which makes it quite difficult to sit down and enjoy. His personal anecdotes make the read feel like it has life, but the second he begins to dive into any other related topic, it becomes quite difficult to commit to finishing. Each chapter has a very broad topic of discussion, which leads to a lot of jumping around within the chapters, and as someone who doesn't have the biggest background within these topics, I found it difficult to follow along with where he was going. As I said, this is a very interesting topic, I just found this to be a bit of a difficult read, as it read more as a textbook, which did teach me new things, it just took a while to actually get to the meat of the topics.
Be sure to check this book out when it is published on January 5, 2026.
I'd like to thank Simon & Schuster and NetGalley for giving me the opportunity to read "Polar War" early in return for an honest review.
Finding the intersections between climate change and global tensions within the arctic is a vastly interesting topic. This book takes an examination at the relations between the two, highlighting the author's personal experiences and historic examples of tensions in the area. As intriguing as this topic is, Rosen, unfortunately, tells it in a very dry, matter-of-fact way, which makes it quite difficult to sit down and enjoy. His personal anecdotes make the read feel like it has life, but the second he begins to dive into any other related topic, it becomes quite difficult to commit to finishing. Each chapter has a very broad topic of discussion, which leads to a lot of jumping around within the chapters, and as someone who doesn't have the biggest background within these topics, I found it difficult to follow along with where he was going. As I said, this is a very interesting topic, I just found this to be a bit of a difficult read, as it read more as a textbook, which did teach me new things, it just took a while to actually get to the meat of the topics.
Be sure to check this book out when it is published on January 5, 2026.
May 9, 2026
Áhugaverð lesning um pólitík á norður heimskautinu og hvernig þróun vígbúnaðar þar hefur verið
September 4, 2026
This was so disappointing as the author came across really well in a podcast but this book read far too much like a Travelog and nothing like an insight into potential arctic warfare. I feel like those recommending should have really highlighted the travelling around and talking to people aspect. I wanted to read about arctic geopolitics and potential conflict (not a huge ask given the book's title, not the author describing a small airport in microscopic detail and dismissing tourists when it felt like he was a tourist too.
I should have stuck to his appearances on political podcasts where they extracted all the fascinating knowledge he has on the region.
Maybe this would have worked better as a documentary where you would have at least gotten a better feel for the people he interviewed and saw this as opposed to the subpar descriptions.
I also know to be more wary of picking up books based on "the rest is politics" recommendations in future.
Disclaimer: the book may have eventually got into the meat of the story but at 20% it was simply too frustrating to endure the travelling aspect amidst occasional nuggets of interest.
For those who enjoy books where the travel, places and people are at the forefront then this could still be very enjoyable. It's just really not my style.
I should have stuck to his appearances on political podcasts where they extracted all the fascinating knowledge he has on the region.
Maybe this would have worked better as a documentary where you would have at least gotten a better feel for the people he interviewed and saw this as opposed to the subpar descriptions.
I also know to be more wary of picking up books based on "the rest is politics" recommendations in future.
Disclaimer: the book may have eventually got into the meat of the story but at 20% it was simply too frustrating to endure the travelling aspect amidst occasional nuggets of interest.
For those who enjoy books where the travel, places and people are at the forefront then this could still be very enjoyable. It's just really not my style.
February 9, 2026
Honestly, I'm a little disappointed. I wanted to read the book because it was recommended on a political podcast as a good way to read up on the current situation surrounding Greenland and the US's claims. While the book is super informative and dives deep into complex issues and discussions surrounding the Arctic, it's also quite jumpy and dry. Especially in the beginning, the narration often jumps between places, people and facts. Without prior knowledge of the Arctic region, I got lost several times. A lot of the people mentioned are not super memorable, since there are just too many names to really keep track. While factual information didn't feel as dry as a textbook, it still got quite complex quite fast. Again, a large part of the issue for me came from names of institutions and where to place them. Unfortunately, there are too many instances in which the narration is interrupted by a barrage of facts, keywords, names, places, and terms, and then continues with narration - which is/was oftentimes not very interesting and unmemorable in the first place.
In several instances, it is either good narration that is interrupted by (in my opinion) a suboptimal presentation of facts and additional information or well presented facts and information dragged out by semi-interesting narration. Nonetheless, there are also some well-developed stories that take the time to convey concrete information and send a particularly strong message while being memorable and enjoyable to read.
This book is probably a good choice for anyone already involved in Arctic politics and familiar with respective terminology and individuals. Without prior knowledge, I learned a lot, but the balance between information and narration didn't guide me as much as I would have liked and instead was off-putting in too many instances.
In several instances, it is either good narration that is interrupted by (in my opinion) a suboptimal presentation of facts and additional information or well presented facts and information dragged out by semi-interesting narration. Nonetheless, there are also some well-developed stories that take the time to convey concrete information and send a particularly strong message while being memorable and enjoyable to read.
This book is probably a good choice for anyone already involved in Arctic politics and familiar with respective terminology and individuals. Without prior knowledge, I learned a lot, but the balance between information and narration didn't guide me as much as I would have liked and instead was off-putting in too many instances.
June 12, 2026
The Arctic is melting. As new sea lanes open up that were once covered year-round in ice there is now stiff competition between the Russians and recently the Chinese and the U.S., Canada, Norway, Sweden, Finland, Iceland and Denmark, which has sovereignty over Greenland. Constant incursions especially by Russia, the biggest Arctic power, is creating rising tension that could boil over into acts of war. The author notes that the U.S. is lagging behind virtually every other player in terms of how it relates to what's already on the table, despite having a significant military presence in Alaska. The book is basically a wake up call to Americans and all interested parties of what might be coming, based on two years the author spent in the Arctic talking to many different civilian experts as well as military personnel. Although his writing style is sometimes convoluted and some passages require a second reading, the book packs a wallop.
February 10, 2026
He’s clearly done extensive research and has a passion for the topic which is increasingly becoming a pressing global issue. However, I found the writing clunky, verbose, and long-winded. At times I was questioning what I had just read. Each chapter also feels more like a mini-essay, rather than a cohesive part of a wider book. You really could just read pages 223 & 224 and have a better understanding of the situation he took the previous 200 pages to outline. Big shame as I had high hopes. It does get better after 100 pages or so, but to get to that point really is a drag, and it soon tapers off back to being as dull as could be. It’s a shame given how fascinating the topic is. It feels like he’s had the ambition to write a book before actually considering whether what he wanted to say warranted a book. In one word: dull.
July 17, 2026
This is not what I was expecting when I read the premise of the book. Instead of a great read, I found a textbook-style writing, with rambling thoughts, and not enough decent analysis to bring it home. While the author may have had good intentions in writing it, there are too many places where he rabbit holes himself on areas (please, tell us how you really feel *sarcasm*), and yet, dancing around different issues where he could have gone much deeper.
I tried the audiobook, it was worse. The narrator was terrible. Do not recommend. Find something else to fill your time.
I tried the audiobook, it was worse. The narrator was terrible. Do not recommend. Find something else to fill your time.
April 16, 2026
I went into this book hoping for a comprehensive look at the geopolitics of the Artic: China's growing interest, Russia's incursions into NATO airspace, the dogsled teams in Greenland, etc. What I got felt more like a journal with facts in it. There were moments of real interest, but the organization of the book just wasn't there. That, coupled with Rosen's clear disdain for anyone who might dare to visit the Artic region as a tourist, made the book difficult to really enjoy.
January 11, 2026
This riveting book about the changing Arctic and its growing importance is part history, part political treatise, part environmental primer, and part a lyrical travelogue. It also is a paean to the Arctic's wild and as yet untouched areas, and its star-filled (and increasingly, Starlink-filled) skies.
Rosen dismisses Trump’s obvious canard that “climate change is a hoax” and instead focuses on how (other) nations across the globe acknowledge the warming planet.
[Note: On December 16, 2025, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration reported: "The Arctic last season was the hottest it has been in the past 125 years. The extent of sea ice during its usual maximum in March was the lowest in 47 years of satellite recordkeeping. The North American tundra was more green with plant life than ever recorded.”]
Rosen sets the stage for his tour of the region by defining the parameters of “the Arctic” and pointing out that the Arctic is warming four to five times faster than the rest of the world. He explains thermohaline circulation, the process by which salt and water temperatures are dispersed throughout the world’s oceans, and provides examples of what climate-related changes have already occurred in Arctic countries. He notes that each year, the planet permanently loses a section of sea ice the size of Nebraska, and what that means for global temperatures.
Many nations regard the Arctic, with its increasing accessibility thanks to melting, as presenting an opportunity for expansion and the establishment of military dominance.
[Trump is not totally oblivious to the value of the Arctic, as shown by his stated intention to “to make Greenland a part of the U.S.” Greenland has rare earth minerals, vital to high-tech industries. This asset has attracted the interest of top officials in the Trump administration, who see an opportunity for - frankly - plunder. As Brian Kilmeade recently said on Fox, "Look, we are going to need their natural resources to mine them . . . But in the meantime, we have to expand our bases there and access to the waterways, because the arctic is melting and we need access there. Russia and China is (sic) trying to dominate.” And Trump's top aide Stephen Miller asserted (after the Venezuela invasion) that Greenland "rightfully" belonged to the United States and that the Trump administration could seize the semiautonomous Danish territory if it wanted, because "We live in a world, in the real world . . . that is governed by strength, that is governed by force, that is governed by power."]
Drawing on interviews with more than 400 individuals and from having embedded himself in a number of Arctic operations, Rosen found serious mismanagement by the US in its half-hearted attempts to pierce the new “ice curtain” in the Arctic. Furthermore, “the Trump Administration’s egregious campaign to ‘get’ and ‘secure’ Greenland” managed to alienate all concerned parties: “America has not gracefully risen to meet the occasion.”
Rather, Rosen reports, US troops sent to train in and patrol the area have to deal with infrastructure dating from the Cold War that is now crumbing as the permafrost melts; a lack of suitable equipment that can withstand the frigid temperatures; chronic underfunding; and low morale combined with a high suicide rate.
[In October, 2025, the US contracted with Finland to build new icebreakers to be purchased for the Coast Guard. Simultaneously, it undermined a long-planned change by the International Maritime Organization to force ships to start paying fees for the greenhouse gases their vessels inevitably emit which damage the climate. (US officials were accused of “bullying” and “intimidation”, as the UK Guardian reported. Specifically, "The US threatened countries, and individual officials, with tariffs, penalties and visa revocations if they supported the pricing mechanism.")]
Other countries have stepped up their commitment. In fact, Rosen points out, some in the Arctic even characterize this as a “pre-war” period.
Rosen ends with a “to-do” list for the U.S. to meet the moment, but it clearly would call for a different Administration to accept the need for, much less endeavor to accomplish, any of his proposed action items.
Evaluation: Fascinating and highly recommended.
Rating: 4.5/5
Rosen dismisses Trump’s obvious canard that “climate change is a hoax” and instead focuses on how (other) nations across the globe acknowledge the warming planet.
[Note: On December 16, 2025, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration reported: "The Arctic last season was the hottest it has been in the past 125 years. The extent of sea ice during its usual maximum in March was the lowest in 47 years of satellite recordkeeping. The North American tundra was more green with plant life than ever recorded.”]
Rosen sets the stage for his tour of the region by defining the parameters of “the Arctic” and pointing out that the Arctic is warming four to five times faster than the rest of the world. He explains thermohaline circulation, the process by which salt and water temperatures are dispersed throughout the world’s oceans, and provides examples of what climate-related changes have already occurred in Arctic countries. He notes that each year, the planet permanently loses a section of sea ice the size of Nebraska, and what that means for global temperatures.
Many nations regard the Arctic, with its increasing accessibility thanks to melting, as presenting an opportunity for expansion and the establishment of military dominance.
[Trump is not totally oblivious to the value of the Arctic, as shown by his stated intention to “to make Greenland a part of the U.S.” Greenland has rare earth minerals, vital to high-tech industries. This asset has attracted the interest of top officials in the Trump administration, who see an opportunity for - frankly - plunder. As Brian Kilmeade recently said on Fox, "Look, we are going to need their natural resources to mine them . . . But in the meantime, we have to expand our bases there and access to the waterways, because the arctic is melting and we need access there. Russia and China is (sic) trying to dominate.” And Trump's top aide Stephen Miller asserted (after the Venezuela invasion) that Greenland "rightfully" belonged to the United States and that the Trump administration could seize the semiautonomous Danish territory if it wanted, because "We live in a world, in the real world . . . that is governed by strength, that is governed by force, that is governed by power."]
Drawing on interviews with more than 400 individuals and from having embedded himself in a number of Arctic operations, Rosen found serious mismanagement by the US in its half-hearted attempts to pierce the new “ice curtain” in the Arctic. Furthermore, “the Trump Administration’s egregious campaign to ‘get’ and ‘secure’ Greenland” managed to alienate all concerned parties: “America has not gracefully risen to meet the occasion.”
Rather, Rosen reports, US troops sent to train in and patrol the area have to deal with infrastructure dating from the Cold War that is now crumbing as the permafrost melts; a lack of suitable equipment that can withstand the frigid temperatures; chronic underfunding; and low morale combined with a high suicide rate.
[In October, 2025, the US contracted with Finland to build new icebreakers to be purchased for the Coast Guard. Simultaneously, it undermined a long-planned change by the International Maritime Organization to force ships to start paying fees for the greenhouse gases their vessels inevitably emit which damage the climate. (US officials were accused of “bullying” and “intimidation”, as the UK Guardian reported. Specifically, "The US threatened countries, and individual officials, with tariffs, penalties and visa revocations if they supported the pricing mechanism.")]
Other countries have stepped up their commitment. In fact, Rosen points out, some in the Arctic even characterize this as a “pre-war” period.
Rosen ends with a “to-do” list for the U.S. to meet the moment, but it clearly would call for a different Administration to accept the need for, much less endeavor to accomplish, any of his proposed action items.
Evaluation: Fascinating and highly recommended.
Rating: 4.5/5
February 4, 2026
A very interesting and well-researched book that can be recommended. Minus one star because it feels like it needs another rewrite, maybe rushed to be published when Greenland was in the news?
July 11, 2026
Great subject matter and some brilliant on-the-ground anecdotes but I didn’t love the writing style
July 18, 2026
While this may be an interesting read for an American audience, I found a lot of the content was common knowledge and never got a lot of value out of it. DNF.
January 11, 2026
“Polar War” is a good choice for readers who are somewhat familiar with the Arctic and its issues. It would not be a good choice for those seeking a simple introduction to the region.
I had positive and not-so-positive reactions to various aspects of the book.
To begin with the positive, author Kenneth R. Rosen’s research is thorough. He covers a wide range of topics affecting the region, including:
its geography, topography, oceanography, climate, and some of its history;
the aims, policies, and missteps of various stakeholder nations, including the United States, Canada, Russia, China, and the Scandinavian countries;
how climate change has impacted and continues to impact the region;
the region’s importance to the earth as a harbinger, and affecter, of its future;
how, as global warming melts ice and snow, the region’s strategic value increases due to newly available natural resources and shipping lanes;
military incursions by Russia and China into territories that are not theirs, including Alaska;
how war is likely to be fought in, and over, the region; and
how ill-prepared and ill-equipped the United States might currently be for such a war; and what the US is doing and needs to do in Alaska.
Mr. Rosen’s research extends far beyond desk and library. As the text makes clear, he has spent significant time at multiple Arctic venues, talking with a wide variety of Arctic residents (both native and transplanted) and professionals, including politicians, policymakers, scientists, corporate executives, and military personnel.
As a result of all this work and study, Mr. Rosen has given us a book that is chock-a-block full of information. For me, it was a good learning experience.
However, I found the writing, editing, and organization of the book somewhat problematic. Organization-wise, “Polar War” seemed scattershot and diffuse—difficult to get a handle on. While there are 19 separate chapters, I had trouble discerning an organizing scheme or principle dictating why information belonged in a particular chapter. Often, “Polar” seemed more a random collection of articles than a well-structured treatise. This often led to a repetition of previously stated points. When combined with some of Mr. Rosen’s efforts at soaring literary prose, the book seemed frequently to lose focus. Many times, I wondered why I was reading what I was reading.
Also, the writing can be quite political (although that’s not necessarily a detriment). Mr. Rosen has strong opinions and is not shy about expressing them. To his credit, while he writes from a progressive point of view, he does not use “Polar” as a soap-box for a slate of progressive policies. Instead, it seemed to me that he is advocating for the Arctic and the people who live there. No matter the government—be it American, Russian, Chinese, or Scandinavian—he is critical of its policies. And he criticizes both Republican and Democrat administrations.
However, also to his credit, he includes an appendix intended for Washington policy makers suggesting steps that need to be taken to protect America’s interests in this region as a whole and in Alaska.
Bottom line: Mr. Rosen has given us a book that tells much about the Arctic, why it’s important, and why, if we ignore it, we do so at our own peril.
I had positive and not-so-positive reactions to various aspects of the book.
To begin with the positive, author Kenneth R. Rosen’s research is thorough. He covers a wide range of topics affecting the region, including:
its geography, topography, oceanography, climate, and some of its history;
the aims, policies, and missteps of various stakeholder nations, including the United States, Canada, Russia, China, and the Scandinavian countries;
how climate change has impacted and continues to impact the region;
the region’s importance to the earth as a harbinger, and affecter, of its future;
how, as global warming melts ice and snow, the region’s strategic value increases due to newly available natural resources and shipping lanes;
military incursions by Russia and China into territories that are not theirs, including Alaska;
how war is likely to be fought in, and over, the region; and
how ill-prepared and ill-equipped the United States might currently be for such a war; and what the US is doing and needs to do in Alaska.
Mr. Rosen’s research extends far beyond desk and library. As the text makes clear, he has spent significant time at multiple Arctic venues, talking with a wide variety of Arctic residents (both native and transplanted) and professionals, including politicians, policymakers, scientists, corporate executives, and military personnel.
As a result of all this work and study, Mr. Rosen has given us a book that is chock-a-block full of information. For me, it was a good learning experience.
However, I found the writing, editing, and organization of the book somewhat problematic. Organization-wise, “Polar War” seemed scattershot and diffuse—difficult to get a handle on. While there are 19 separate chapters, I had trouble discerning an organizing scheme or principle dictating why information belonged in a particular chapter. Often, “Polar” seemed more a random collection of articles than a well-structured treatise. This often led to a repetition of previously stated points. When combined with some of Mr. Rosen’s efforts at soaring literary prose, the book seemed frequently to lose focus. Many times, I wondered why I was reading what I was reading.
Also, the writing can be quite political (although that’s not necessarily a detriment). Mr. Rosen has strong opinions and is not shy about expressing them. To his credit, while he writes from a progressive point of view, he does not use “Polar” as a soap-box for a slate of progressive policies. Instead, it seemed to me that he is advocating for the Arctic and the people who live there. No matter the government—be it American, Russian, Chinese, or Scandinavian—he is critical of its policies. And he criticizes both Republican and Democrat administrations.
However, also to his credit, he includes an appendix intended for Washington policy makers suggesting steps that need to be taken to protect America’s interests in this region as a whole and in Alaska.
Bottom line: Mr. Rosen has given us a book that tells much about the Arctic, why it’s important, and why, if we ignore it, we do so at our own peril.
Review of advance copy received from Netgalley
From the title Polar War: Submarines, Spies, and the Struggle for Power in a Melting Arctic, I went in expecting something closer to a narrative-style nonfiction book: real-life stories, vivid scenes, maybe a blend of history and almost thriller-like storytelling set in a fascinating, remote region. Instead, what I found felt much more like a heavily political and critical overview of the Arctic as a contested space.
The book does cover important topics—geopolitics, climate change, military strategy, and the race for influence in a rapidly changing environment. But for me, the tone came across as consistently negative in how it framed the region and its future. I wasn’t bothered by the climate change discussion itself; that’s obviously central to any serious examination of the Arctic. What didn’t work for me was the way the overall narrative seemed to lean so hard into the bleakness and political angle that it drowned out the sense of place and the human stories I was hoping for.
Based on the description, I expected more of a “story” about submarines, spies, and specific people on the ground (and under the water), maybe through case studies or narrative arcs I could follow.
Instead, the book felt more like a broad, somewhat pessimistic survey. I kept waiting to be pulled into something more personal or immersive—local communities, historical moments, individuals whose lives intersect with this conflict—but those kinds of elements felt limited or overshadowed by the big-picture commentary.
Because of that, the book felt like a missed opportunity. The Arctic is an incredibly interesting and complex region, rich with culture, history, and real human stakes behind the politics. I believe there are so many stories waiting to be told there—stories that could have balanced the necessary warnings about climate and power struggles with nuance, complexity, and maybe even some hope or curiosity. Instead, the focus stayed so firmly on the darker, geopolitical aspects that it became a bit of a slog for me as a reader.
Readers who primarily want a political and strategic overview of the Arctic might get more out of this than I did. But if you’re looking for a narrative-driven exploration of submarines, espionage, and life in a changing polar world, this may not scratch that itch. For me, the tone and approach just didn’t match what I was expecting, and I came away more disappointed than informed or inspired. However, Rosen has peeked my curiosity about the region, I will seek further information about the Arctic. There has to be something good to say.
Thank you to NetGalley and Simon & Schuster for the advance copy.
The book does cover important topics—geopolitics, climate change, military strategy, and the race for influence in a rapidly changing environment. But for me, the tone came across as consistently negative in how it framed the region and its future. I wasn’t bothered by the climate change discussion itself; that’s obviously central to any serious examination of the Arctic. What didn’t work for me was the way the overall narrative seemed to lean so hard into the bleakness and political angle that it drowned out the sense of place and the human stories I was hoping for.
Based on the description, I expected more of a “story” about submarines, spies, and specific people on the ground (and under the water), maybe through case studies or narrative arcs I could follow.
Instead, the book felt more like a broad, somewhat pessimistic survey. I kept waiting to be pulled into something more personal or immersive—local communities, historical moments, individuals whose lives intersect with this conflict—but those kinds of elements felt limited or overshadowed by the big-picture commentary.
Because of that, the book felt like a missed opportunity. The Arctic is an incredibly interesting and complex region, rich with culture, history, and real human stakes behind the politics. I believe there are so many stories waiting to be told there—stories that could have balanced the necessary warnings about climate and power struggles with nuance, complexity, and maybe even some hope or curiosity. Instead, the focus stayed so firmly on the darker, geopolitical aspects that it became a bit of a slog for me as a reader.
Readers who primarily want a political and strategic overview of the Arctic might get more out of this than I did. But if you’re looking for a narrative-driven exploration of submarines, espionage, and life in a changing polar world, this may not scratch that itch. For me, the tone and approach just didn’t match what I was expecting, and I came away more disappointed than informed or inspired. However, Rosen has peeked my curiosity about the region, I will seek further information about the Arctic. There has to be something good to say.
Thank you to NetGalley and Simon & Schuster for the advance copy.
July 11, 2026
The author did a lot of research on the ground, so to speak, interviewing over 400 people and doing what appears to be almost exhaustive on-line readings. Many books are listed in the bibliography, which is what we would expect given the magnitude of the polar issues discussed in his book. One word of caution and/or critique. I feel that the author relied too much on articles from the NY Times, NPR, and PBS which all have a very liberal bias, particularly regarding “climate change” and criticism of President Trump. I would have liked to see some use of professional military journals (Army War College Parameters, USA Military Review, Naval War. College Review) or other strategic think tank publications when discussing military topics.
Rosen does a good job of telling us what he saw firsthand and describing the people he met who are dealing with conditions on the ground. He gives us their side of the story emphasizing empathy for their hardships and disappointments. For a hard-hitting non-fiction book with national policy recommendations (at the appendix) some fuller discussion of other considerations beyond criticizing national leaders is warranted.
I found the discussion about military forces positioning, training, equipping, and supplying spot on. Many of his recommendations have in fact been addressed by the Trump administration early in 2025 and as Rosen mentions were incorporated in the One Big Beautiful bill. Some things he suggests, such as increased cutter capability and cooperation with Nordic shipping companies, are being done but not mentioned in the book. I recognize that there is always a cut-off date for publication, so I will cut him some slack, but also wish he would give the current administration some credit. There is indeed significant differences between the Obama, Biden, and Trump approaches philosophically, managerially, and politically.
The largest whale in the water, so to speak, is “climate change.” More precisely it is the assumption that “everyone agrees” [cliché] with the existence of phenomena without a clear definition, absent scientifically reproducible objective proof of whatever is causing the phenomena, and justification for the advertised total lifestyle solutions which are globalist in nature, economically challenging for just the USA, who is shamed into infrastructure change not required of others (therefore of dubious value) and forking over trillions to other countries for whatever.
Rosen does a good job of telling us what he saw firsthand and describing the people he met who are dealing with conditions on the ground. He gives us their side of the story emphasizing empathy for their hardships and disappointments. For a hard-hitting non-fiction book with national policy recommendations (at the appendix) some fuller discussion of other considerations beyond criticizing national leaders is warranted.
I found the discussion about military forces positioning, training, equipping, and supplying spot on. Many of his recommendations have in fact been addressed by the Trump administration early in 2025 and as Rosen mentions were incorporated in the One Big Beautiful bill. Some things he suggests, such as increased cutter capability and cooperation with Nordic shipping companies, are being done but not mentioned in the book. I recognize that there is always a cut-off date for publication, so I will cut him some slack, but also wish he would give the current administration some credit. There is indeed significant differences between the Obama, Biden, and Trump approaches philosophically, managerially, and politically.
The largest whale in the water, so to speak, is “climate change.” More precisely it is the assumption that “everyone agrees” [cliché] with the existence of phenomena without a clear definition, absent scientifically reproducible objective proof of whatever is causing the phenomena, and justification for the advertised total lifestyle solutions which are globalist in nature, economically challenging for just the USA, who is shamed into infrastructure change not required of others (therefore of dubious value) and forking over trillions to other countries for whatever.
Review of advance copy received from Publisher
We have another problem with titles and subtitles. Polar War: Submarines, Spies, and the Struggle for Power in a Melting Arctic by Kenneth Rosen is another book where expectations are set but not met. In fact, if they just kept the subtitle to "The Struggle for the Melting Arctic" then it would have been much more accurate. Spies, for instance, probably only come up for about 10 pages total.
The most accurate subtitle, however, would be "How America is Falling Behind in the Race for the Arctic." Rosen's narrative is mainly about how the U.S. Government is falling hopelessly behind in strategically placing themselves in the Arctic. This is more akin to a political position paper. I don't ding books for titles because often the author loses control on that front. Rosen's book is a letdown because of two things.
First, it is just generally negative. It is part travelogue. Usually, an author who gets to travel to exotic places will give the reader a sense of the beauty and otherworldliness (I think I made up that word but you get it) of the surroundings. Rosen seems to present each locale as a problem to be solved or a place he is forced to travel to. Yes, these are forbidding places, but I'd love to know more because they are so unique.
Second, and more importantly, Rosen doesn't hit on the "why" the reader should care about his thesis. He completely sold me that the U.S. is falling behind in the Arctic, and he clearly shows who is taking it more seriously like Russia and China. However, I kept wondering what are the specific reasons we should be worried about other powers and their focus on the area. Rosen doesn't completely skip this, but his explanations are precious little of the page count. And yes, I believe if you are writing something like this you need to be specific about the why even if it might be self-evident.
If you are a policy wonk, this may be a good choice for you. Those who want to get lost in the Arctic, are looking for historical adventure, or just want a fun jaunt will need to look elsewhere.
(This book was provided as an advance reader copy by Simon & Schuster.)
The most accurate subtitle, however, would be "How America is Falling Behind in the Race for the Arctic." Rosen's narrative is mainly about how the U.S. Government is falling hopelessly behind in strategically placing themselves in the Arctic. This is more akin to a political position paper. I don't ding books for titles because often the author loses control on that front. Rosen's book is a letdown because of two things.
First, it is just generally negative. It is part travelogue. Usually, an author who gets to travel to exotic places will give the reader a sense of the beauty and otherworldliness (I think I made up that word but you get it) of the surroundings. Rosen seems to present each locale as a problem to be solved or a place he is forced to travel to. Yes, these are forbidding places, but I'd love to know more because they are so unique.
Second, and more importantly, Rosen doesn't hit on the "why" the reader should care about his thesis. He completely sold me that the U.S. is falling behind in the Arctic, and he clearly shows who is taking it more seriously like Russia and China. However, I kept wondering what are the specific reasons we should be worried about other powers and their focus on the area. Rosen doesn't completely skip this, but his explanations are precious little of the page count. And yes, I believe if you are writing something like this you need to be specific about the why even if it might be self-evident.
If you are a policy wonk, this may be a good choice for you. Those who want to get lost in the Arctic, are looking for historical adventure, or just want a fun jaunt will need to look elsewhere.
(This book was provided as an advance reader copy by Simon & Schuster.)
February 17, 2026
Genuine and Candid
Polar War (PW) is current and vivid. To write it, Kenneth Rosen spent 24 months traveling as a reporter in the arctic, starting in 2022, and recounts his experiences in Alaska, Norway, Greenland, Denmark, Iceland, Sweden and Finland, from trips aboard US Coast Guard and Norwegian icebreakers to a visit to the Finnish fence being built on the border with Russia and reporting directly from military training exercises in Sweden and at Delta Junction in Alaska.
I guess the only limitation of the book is its main virtue : as it weaves Rosen's personal experience with his own interpretation of the broader picture of the ever-more complicated geopolitical dynamics in the region, PW freely drifts from the very relatable and even poetic storytelling to a more distanced, journalistic report. The mix of story and information is not always balanced and could have been better edited, especially because some hard data seem more than once left out of context, inviting the reader to take figures and stats with a grain of salt.
Facts and numbers indeed come more to reinforce Rosen's own connection with what he experienced and saw than to build a clear big picture. The intellectual process of writing this book is described in the footnotes as a kind of memoir : newspaper and scholarly articles, notes from interviews he made, inquiries to the government and (surprise), a recipe for a friend's grandma's blood sausage. Even the way the last chapters bring their point is almost lyrical : from the human perspective of US soldiers who can't cope with depression caused by the desolate and inclement arctic, to the Nature's perspective of the last spruce trees in the northernmost parts of the boreal forest, which are silent and defenseless against human abuse.
But the book fulfills its purpose, which is providing a genuine description of the arctic that goes beyond scholarly or military reports. It is like drinking beers with him in Coldfoot, the last fueling stop on the Dalton Highway when driving to Deadhorse, the northernmost station in Alaska. Rich in details that only someone who has been there can give.
Polar War (PW) is current and vivid. To write it, Kenneth Rosen spent 24 months traveling as a reporter in the arctic, starting in 2022, and recounts his experiences in Alaska, Norway, Greenland, Denmark, Iceland, Sweden and Finland, from trips aboard US Coast Guard and Norwegian icebreakers to a visit to the Finnish fence being built on the border with Russia and reporting directly from military training exercises in Sweden and at Delta Junction in Alaska.
I guess the only limitation of the book is its main virtue : as it weaves Rosen's personal experience with his own interpretation of the broader picture of the ever-more complicated geopolitical dynamics in the region, PW freely drifts from the very relatable and even poetic storytelling to a more distanced, journalistic report. The mix of story and information is not always balanced and could have been better edited, especially because some hard data seem more than once left out of context, inviting the reader to take figures and stats with a grain of salt.
Facts and numbers indeed come more to reinforce Rosen's own connection with what he experienced and saw than to build a clear big picture. The intellectual process of writing this book is described in the footnotes as a kind of memoir : newspaper and scholarly articles, notes from interviews he made, inquiries to the government and (surprise), a recipe for a friend's grandma's blood sausage. Even the way the last chapters bring their point is almost lyrical : from the human perspective of US soldiers who can't cope with depression caused by the desolate and inclement arctic, to the Nature's perspective of the last spruce trees in the northernmost parts of the boreal forest, which are silent and defenseless against human abuse.
But the book fulfills its purpose, which is providing a genuine description of the arctic that goes beyond scholarly or military reports. It is like drinking beers with him in Coldfoot, the last fueling stop on the Dalton Highway when driving to Deadhorse, the northernmost station in Alaska. Rich in details that only someone who has been there can give.
February 11, 2026
Polar War is a book providing insights for policy makers, defense planners and senior leaders. The messages it tries to deliver include …
(1) The Arctic is a core military domain which is no longer a frozen buffer. It is a primary operating environment for nuclear deterrence, submarine warfare, and strategic intelligence. Control of under-ice spaces directly affects second-strike survivability and transatlantic reinforcement routes.
(2) Russia holds structural advantage and benefits from geography, established Arctic bases, a dominant icebreaker fleet, and sustained institutional focus with the Northern Fleet anchors its nuclear deterrent and regional control.
(3) The United States and NATO face capability gaps. Despite technological superiority in some domains, the U.S. and allies lack sufficient Arctic infrastructure, icebreaking capacity, and persistent under-ice operational experience.
(4) China Is positioning for long-term Influence with its self declared “near-Arctic state” posture that emphasizes science, infrastructure investment, shipping, and data collection. Beijing’s approach is indirect but strategic.
(5) Climate change is a force multiplier with melting ice expands access while increasing volatility. It compresses strategic timelines and rewards states prepared for adaptation.
(6) Legal and governance mechanisms are limited. International law and Arctic institutions mitigate friction but exclude hard security competition. They cannot substitute for deterrence or presence.
(7) Escalation risk is structurally high due to the Arctic’s opacity, submarine proximity, and infrastructure vulnerability elevates miscalculation risk. Incidents could cascade into broader conflict.
(1) The Arctic is a core military domain which is no longer a frozen buffer. It is a primary operating environment for nuclear deterrence, submarine warfare, and strategic intelligence. Control of under-ice spaces directly affects second-strike survivability and transatlantic reinforcement routes.
(2) Russia holds structural advantage and benefits from geography, established Arctic bases, a dominant icebreaker fleet, and sustained institutional focus with the Northern Fleet anchors its nuclear deterrent and regional control.
(3) The United States and NATO face capability gaps. Despite technological superiority in some domains, the U.S. and allies lack sufficient Arctic infrastructure, icebreaking capacity, and persistent under-ice operational experience.
(4) China Is positioning for long-term Influence with its self declared “near-Arctic state” posture that emphasizes science, infrastructure investment, shipping, and data collection. Beijing’s approach is indirect but strategic.
(5) Climate change is a force multiplier with melting ice expands access while increasing volatility. It compresses strategic timelines and rewards states prepared for adaptation.
(6) Legal and governance mechanisms are limited. International law and Arctic institutions mitigate friction but exclude hard security competition. They cannot substitute for deterrence or presence.
(7) Escalation risk is structurally high due to the Arctic’s opacity, submarine proximity, and infrastructure vulnerability elevates miscalculation risk. Incidents could cascade into broader conflict.
June 26, 2026
One can acknowledge the significant effort the author invested in fieldwork across the Arctic. The book clearly reflects extensive travel and on-the-ground reporting, and for a reader using tools such as maps alongside the text, it can provide useful factual orientation about remote Arctic locations and conditions.
However, as an analytical work on Arctic geopolitics, the book is deeply flawed.
The perspective is strongly U.S.-centric, consistently interpreting the Arctic through an American strategic lens. Russia and China are largely framed as external threats, while the United States and its allies are implicitly positioned as defensive actors who must accelerate militarization and infrastructure development. This produces a simplified binary narrative that lacks analytical balance.
The motivations of Russia and China are not seriously examined in terms of history, security logic, geography, or economic drivers. As a result, complex international dynamics are reduced to a one-directional interpretation of “threat versus response.”
There is also a clear tension between the environmental narrative and the strategic conclusions. While the book highlights climate change and ecological fragility, it largely sidelines alternatives such as de-escalation, cooperation, or demilitarization in favor of increased military presence.
Overall, while it contains valuable reportage material, the book fails as a coherent geopolitical analysis and is ultimately a poor work.
However, as an analytical work on Arctic geopolitics, the book is deeply flawed.
The perspective is strongly U.S.-centric, consistently interpreting the Arctic through an American strategic lens. Russia and China are largely framed as external threats, while the United States and its allies are implicitly positioned as defensive actors who must accelerate militarization and infrastructure development. This produces a simplified binary narrative that lacks analytical balance.
The motivations of Russia and China are not seriously examined in terms of history, security logic, geography, or economic drivers. As a result, complex international dynamics are reduced to a one-directional interpretation of “threat versus response.”
There is also a clear tension between the environmental narrative and the strategic conclusions. While the book highlights climate change and ecological fragility, it largely sidelines alternatives such as de-escalation, cooperation, or demilitarization in favor of increased military presence.
Overall, while it contains valuable reportage material, the book fails as a coherent geopolitical analysis and is ultimately a poor work.
May 3, 2026
Well-written and contains important information. These things are true:
Human-caused global climate change is real, and accelerating, and disproportionately affecting the arctic.
A warming arctic means more opportunities for shipping, exploration, exploitation, and military activities.
The arctic nations are the US, Canada, Greenland(Denmark), Norway, and Russia. Russia controls half the coastline and is avidly pursuing arctic activities.
The US is seriously underprepared for arctic activities. We have a total of 4 icebreakers, of which only one, the Healy, operates in the arctic--and it's 30 years old. Norway has more icebreakers and Russia has the most.
Trump is offending our NATO allies who we should be collaborating with (Denmark, Canada).
Due to international condemnation of Russia since it invaded Ukraine, there is no international collaboration on arctic science anymore. This affects countries that aren't even in the arctic, such as India, which is already feeling significant harmful effects of climate change.
China and Russia are collaborating to install military outposts in the arctic, and are willing to spend a lot of money to do so.
Trump and Putin are existential threats to 8+ billion people on the planet.
Human-caused global climate change is real, and accelerating, and disproportionately affecting the arctic.
A warming arctic means more opportunities for shipping, exploration, exploitation, and military activities.
The arctic nations are the US, Canada, Greenland(Denmark), Norway, and Russia. Russia controls half the coastline and is avidly pursuing arctic activities.
The US is seriously underprepared for arctic activities. We have a total of 4 icebreakers, of which only one, the Healy, operates in the arctic--and it's 30 years old. Norway has more icebreakers and Russia has the most.
Trump is offending our NATO allies who we should be collaborating with (Denmark, Canada).
Due to international condemnation of Russia since it invaded Ukraine, there is no international collaboration on arctic science anymore. This affects countries that aren't even in the arctic, such as India, which is already feeling significant harmful effects of climate change.
China and Russia are collaborating to install military outposts in the arctic, and are willing to spend a lot of money to do so.
Trump and Putin are existential threats to 8+ billion people on the planet.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 79 reviews