Donald Trump has set out to outstrip Russia in the number of icebreakers made. Currently Moscow leads the way in this statistic, whereas Washington only has two completed vessels of this type, making it 48 short of the target. Experts say the US will not be able to do the job on its own. Who could potentially give them a hand and how efficient that help could be?
The US is out step up its icebreaker fleet. According to President Donald Trump, soon enough Washington will order the construction of 48 new icebreakers. Russia, he added, has 40 such vessels and the US has to bridge that massive gap.
Trump’s touted initiative has already prompted a reaction from Canada. In his interview with Defense News, David Hargreaves, senior vice president at Seaspan, a large maritime asset operator, described the plan as ‘ambitious’. He also offered help building these many vessels. In particular, the company is purportedly willing to overhaul the Polar Class 4 icebreak by tailoring it to the US needs.
Currently Washington boasts just two heavy polar-class icebreakers: Polar Star and Healy. The two will continue operations before both can get replaced. However, according to the US Government Accountability Office, both already are beyond the intended service lives and require a large-scale maintenance effort.
The Wall Street Journal points out that building new icebreakers will be a tough challenge for America. The White House ordered the construction of the three Polar Class 2 icebreakers, one of them called USCGC Polar Sentinel, back in 2019. The first one will not be completed until 2030. The US Congress estimates the total construction costs at $5.1bn, a 60% increase over the originally planned budget.
But the US’s closest allies are not faring much better in the icebreaker department either. Despite its Arctic coastline stretching for more 160,000 kilometres, Canada only has two heavy icebreakers, while Europe accounts for a total of 13 such vessels combined.
Russia, on the other hand, is at the top of its game, with 34 diesel-powered and seven nuclear-powered icebreakers in store. In the autumn of 2024, St Petersburg hosted the ceremonial launch of Chukotka, the country’s fifth nuclear-powered icebreaker under the 22220 project. The ship is slated to be commissioned in 2026.
By 2030, the United Shipbuilding Corporation is set to have transferred a total of seven icebreakers, including the already completed Sibir and Ural as well as Chukotka and Yakutia that are currently being built, to Rosatom, a state-run nuclear energy corporation. In 2028, Leningrad is expected to follow suit. In 2030, the roster is scheduled to be joined by Stalingrad for a total of seven ships. Mind you, there are smaller ships too that are about to hit the waters.
Experts believe Donald Trump’s icebreaker initiative resulted from the realisation of Russia’s superiority in said industry. Amid the Arctic’s growing strategic importance, the Potus will attempt to equalise and then outstrip Moscow.
‘America’s and the EU’s production capabilities should not be underestimated,’ Rafael Ordukhanyan, a PhD in US political studies, warns. ‘The orders will be routed to Finland, Germany, Norway, Sweden, the Netherlands and other countries that have large shipyards. But some of them can be built stateside as well.’
But trying to catch up with, let alone outstrip, Russia, he believes, will be a tall order, seeing as the country boasts decades-long traditions in the research, design and production of icebreakers. The Soviet Union even introduced a nationwide programme. For the Americans, however, it is still largely an uncharted territory.
Importantly, the US historically prioritised the investment in carrier strike groups and military bases over the Arctic programmes as, following the collapse of the Soviet Union, they severely downplayed Russia’s competitive capabilities, experts agree.
‘The current leaders in civil shipbuilding rates are China, South Korea and Japan,’ says Konstantin Blokhin, a lead researcher at the Centre for Security Studies. ‘Sure enough, the US will be closely cooperating with its allies in Europe and Asia. Even though Trump is interested in limiting it to domestic-only production, it is simply unfeasible at the moment.’ But Trump’s Arctic-related charge is quite reasonable, for the region is estimated to store $60 trillion worth in natural resources. Hence the Americans drive to step up their Arctic presence.
Trump’s Greenland aspirations can also be viewed as part of the Arctic race whose strategic and political significance will keep rising, experts believe. The growing political aspect of it is also emphasised by Dr Ordukhanyan who says: ‘The Polar Class programme itself is a testament to the seriousness of their take on a potential future rivalry between the Northern Sea Route and the Northwest Passage.’
‘That is where the Greenland part kicks in,’ the researcher adds. ‘If the US were to take over the island, their Arctic clout would increase dramatically. They may even try to take charge of the regional trade routes.’ The Arctic programme already features Russia, China and the US.
In response to D.C.’s plans, Moscow will perhaps be building strategic partnerships with other countries in a bid to jointly operate the Northern Sea Route. Alternatively, however, Russia could forge a partnership with the US too to avoid the growing tensions in the Arctic.
According to Dr Ordukhanyan, America’s current policy proves the potential profitability of the Northern Sea Route. ‘One option is that once the US has ramped up its icebreaker fleet, it will be partnering with Russia in shipping the goods from China to Europe and tapping into the financial gains,’ the researcher concludes.