After Exceptionalism: Mapping the Debate on the Arctic as a New Strategic Theatre

Shielded by thick ice, the Arctic historically remained a relatively quiet strategic theatre. Characterized by multilateral cooperation and desecuritization, Arctic Exceptionalism was the dominant description of the region's strategic environment. In recent years, however, Arctic Exceptionalism eroded and collapsed in light of the intensifying strategic competition among great powers coupled with the thinning Arctic ice caused by climate change. Scholarly writings have followed on the question of what has replaced Arctic Exceptionalism. While they all agree that Arctic Exceptionalism has indeed collapsed, they disagree on the nature of the contemporary Arctic as a strategic theatre. But what exactly is the contour of this debate? The present paper aims at mapping out these arguments systematically, while using John Gerring's, as well as Gary Goertz's, conceptual analysis methods as heuristic guidelines. The paper has found that two general clusters exist in this debate: the Alarmist and Cautiously Optimist clusters. Rob Huebert and Whitney Lackenbauer are representative scholars, respectively. Furthermore, the general agreements within a cluster, as well as the disagreements between the two clusters, center on two general themes or dimensions: (1) the Arctic geopolitical landscape and (2) great powers' outlooks toward the present Arctic. Finally, each cluster is not always coherent or tightly unified across these two themes. The paper has found that Cautiously Optimists are significantly scattered on both themes, and that there are what can be labelled as "outliers" and "in-between" analysts. In sum, the paper argues that the post-exceptionalism Arctic can be mapped out in an organized and systematic manner: with a loose bipolar model—the Alarmist and the Cautiously Optimist clusters—across the two general themes. Such an intellectual map shows that the ongoing debate about the state of the Arctic as a strategic theatre is not chaotic but more orderly and more focused than what a causal observation may suggest. The paper articulates these findings while utilizing figures for easier and comprehensive understanding.