What happened?
On 20 May 2021, the Senior Arctic Officials and foreign ministers of eight Arctic countries met in Reykjavík. The meeting marked the conclusion of the Icelandic Chairmanship (2019-21) and the beginning of the Russian (2021-23). 

The Ministerial meeting adopted the "Arctic Council Strategic Plan 2021 to 2030", the first of its kind for the region, which will be the long-term framework guiding the Council's work till 2030. It also approved and adopted the "Reykjavík Declaration 2021". 

What is the background?
First, the international importance of the Arctic. While climate change is a crucial challenge affecting every part of the globe, the Arctic faces a disproportionate impact. The pace of warming in the region is three times faster than the global average. Changes happening in the Arctic do not remain within the confines of the Arctic Circle. Instead, they have significant effects outside. In recent years, the international attention on the Arctic has been increasing due to climate change, the potential resources- both renewable and non-renewable, the presence of Asian countries, particularly China, increased militarization and other security issues. 

Second, the Arctic Council's performance. At the Ministerial meeting, Finland noted that the Council's achievements had exceeded the expectations. After 25 years of its establishment, it remains the primary forum for discussing Arctic issues. While there are significant geopolitical concerns, the Arctic Council has successfully kept the diplomatic channels open, to the extent that the tensions between the US-Western Europe and Russia in 2014 failed to impact the Arctic cooperation negatively. It has successfully brought three legally binding treaties on central themes. The Council has numerous challenges, including the militarization of the region, climate adaptation, connectivity, the growing global attention, food and energy security. 

Third, the Council's success under Iceland's chairmanship. Iceland focused extensively on ocean issues, especially on marine litter. It was successful in continuing the Council's work during the pandemic, holding the joint meeting between the Arctic Council and the Arctic Economic Council, negotiating and bringing the Arctic Council Strategic Plan, and adopting the Reykjavík Declaration. The Finnish Chairmanship ended without a declaration, mainly due to the Trump administration's stance on climate change and Paris Agreement. The changed stance under Joe Biden has contributed to adopting a stronger language for climate change and environmental protection through the Reykjavík Declaration. The key takeaway from Iceland's chairmanship was the implementation of projects. 

Fourth, the politicization of the Arctic. In recent years, the region is facing increasing militarization and dormant geopolitical concerns. Though the Arctic is practically free of any land/maritime dispute, the chances of new disputes arising cannot be ignored. With China's foray into the North, speculations of more politicization and militarization of the Arctic are rife. 

What does it mean?
First, the necessity for a long-term plan. The Strategic Plan adopted at the Ministerial is a welcome step. A long-term plan ought to be in place to ensure continuity of the work when the chairmanship rotates between the eight countries. The Plan has listed seven goals under three categories- Environmental Protection, Sustainable Development and Strengthening the Arctic Council. It is expected to guide the priorities of the upcoming Chairmanships. 

Second, the need for Russia's balancing act. At the Ministerial, Iceland and the US particularly emphasized that the Arctic is a zone of peace and there are pertinent matters beyond competition and conflict. The views can be attributed to the speculations about Russian chairmanship. Russia prioritizes its economic needs and sovereignty in the North and harbours interests to revive pre-1991 Soviet interests in the region. Balancing between its national interests and regional interests, the Council's larger goals and the perceptions of other countries can be a major challenge for Moscow for the next two years.