- NATO officials say European allies, led by the UK and Scandinavian countries, now carry the main responsibility for Arctic military operations due to limited U.S. capability and experience.
- Allied exercises show the United States relies on European forces for Arctic operations, including ice-breaking, ground maneuver, and maritime surveillance.
NATO defense officials have confirmed that European allies, led by the United Kingdom and Scandinavian countries, currently carry the primary responsibility for Arctic military operations, as the United States lacks sufficient forces and experience for sustained activity in the High North, according to The Times.
The assessment follows recent allied exercises and internal NATO evaluations showing that Arctic-ready capabilities are concentrated in Europe rather than the United States.
Officials said forces from the UK, Norway, Finland, and Sweden are now the alliance’s most prepared units for operations in extreme cold, ice-covered terrain, while U.S. forces remain limited in both equipment and training for the environment.
One military source cited last year’s Joint Viking exercise in northern Norway as a clear example of the imbalance. During the exercise, American troops struggled to operate effectively in Arctic conditions, prompting exercise commanders to intervene.
“Exercise commanders had to ask Finnish reservists, the most formidable Arctic warriors, who were playing the role of invaders in the war games, to go easy on the Americans,” the source said. “The Finns had to be told to stop beating the Americans as it was embarrassing and demoralising for them.”
The exercise involved NATO ground, air, and maritime units operating in subzero temperatures, deep snow, and limited daylight—conditions that mirror real-world scenarios in the Arctic region. Finnish reservists, who train regularly in such environments, were assessed as outperforming U.S. units in mobility, endurance, and tactical coordination.
According to military officials, the United States is also dependent on Finland for advanced ice-breaking naval technology, which remains essential for operating in frozen waters. European navies, particularly those of Finland and Norway, maintain ice-capable fleets and decades of operational knowledge that the U.S. currently lacks at scale.
“The Europeans have the savoir-faire,” one military source said. “If Trump wants to defend the region, he is going the wrong way about it by rubbing his Arctic allies up the wrong way.”
British forces play a central role in NATO’s Arctic posture, with the Royal Navy providing submarine patrols, maritime surveillance, and under-ice experience developed over decades of Cold War and post-Cold War operations. The UK also operates P-8 Poseidon maritime patrol aircraft optimized for submarine tracking in the North Atlantic and High North.
Scandinavian nations form the backbone of NATO’s Arctic land and sea capability. Norway hosts regular cold-weather exercises, Finland provides ice-breaking expertise and Arctic ground forces, and Sweden contributes air and naval units adapted for operations in frozen environments. Together, these forces now form the alliance’s primary line of defense in the region.
General Sir James Everard, former deputy supreme allied commander in Europe, said Greenland and the wider Arctic should not be viewed as an immediate military crisis but as a zone of long-term strategic competition.
“I think threat is the wrong word,” Everard said. “There is no immediate military threat, but Greenland is mineral-rich. Everyone wants a slice of the pie, so there are longer-term security and commercial risks that need to be managed. NATO has a good force employment strategy that can be expanded as necessary, but you need to agree on the role and purpose.”
NATO planners are now reviewing how European-led forces should be deployed across the Arctic, including options for expanded air surveillance, maritime patrols, and naval presence around Greenland and the northern approaches to the Atlantic. Officials said the alliance’s existing strategy allows for adjustments but requires political agreement on priorities and command responsibilities.
U.S. defense planning documents have historically focused on the Indo-Pacific and Europe’s eastern flank, leaving Arctic capability development largely to allies with regional experience. Military sources said this has created a dependency that is now evident as Arctic access expands due to climate change and growing commercial activity.