Aug 24, 2026
ManyPress

Advertisement

War & Conflicts

A researcher suggests that the Trans-Arctic transport corridor is evolving into a geopolitical project, potentially attracting interest from several nations.

ManyPress

ManyPress

ManyPress Editorial

2 min readSource:TASS (English)
Expert suggests potential for new coalition around Trans-Arctic transport corridor

Key facts

  • Irina Strelnikova of the Higher School of Economics identified the Trans-Arctic corridor as a growing geopolitical project.
  • China, India, and the UAE are cited as potential members of a new state coalition.
  • Belarus, Kazakhstan, and Uzbekistan are interested in the project for market access and logistics.
  • Success depends on aligning economic interests and resolving disputes over the Northern Sea Route's legal status.
  • US sanctions and geopolitical competition are identified as primary obstacles to a unified coalition.

Irina Strelnikova, director of the Center for Interdisciplinary Arctic Studies at the Higher School of Economics, stated that a new coalition of states could form around the Trans-Arctic transport corridor. She noted that the project is increasingly functioning as both an economic and geopolitical endeavor.

Potential participants and interests

According to Strelnikova, China, India, and the United Arab Emirates are potential participants in such an alliance. Additionally, Belarus, Kazakhstan, and Uzbekistan have shown interest in the project as a means to expand transport chains and access new markets.

Requirements and obstacles

Strelnikova emphasized that a stable coalition would require aligned economic interests, including access to resources and logistics development. Participants would also need to demonstrate political will and reach agreements on the legal status of the Northern Sea Route. Potential challenges to the formation of a unified coalition include geopolitical competition, US sanctions, and the risk of fragmented cooperation. Strelnikova noted that these factors could lead to separate bilateral partnerships rather than a single, unified alliance.

Advertisement

This article was independently rewritten by ManyPress editorial AI from reporting originally published by TASS (English).

War & Conflicts