Opening up the Arctic region and Russia's submarine fleet.

Does Russia need the Arctic region? The question might seem odd and irrelevant now that Russia finds itself in a difficult economic and military-political situation following diverse reforms since the early 1990s. But the answer is not all that simple. Attitude to the Russian North and the Arctic reflects one of the aspects of Russia's development strategy. But how the problem of the country's strategic national interests is treated and should be treated by all agencies of public administration is another matter.

The world's northern region occupies over 20 million square kilometers. In the early 1990s the largest northlands--Russia, Canada and the United States--accounted for 11 million square kilometers and a population of 9 million, 7 million square kilometers and a population of 0.6 million, 1.5 million square kilometers and a population of 0.6 million, respectively.* Now that the Soviet Union has broken up, the northern region accounts for 65% of Russia's territory (the corresponding figure at the time of the Soviet Union was 49%). These little-developed Russian territories are the world's largest treasure house of natural resources. According to a UN estimate, Russia has 28 trillion dollars' worth of natural reserves, with the country's north accounting for 70 to 80 percent. Nearly 100% of the explored reserves of nickel, cobalt, tin and rare earth elements are in the North. Incidentally, the resources of the United State are estimated at 8 trillion dollars. Expert estimates put Russian offshore deposits in the Arctic at scores of billions of tons of oil and scores of trillions of natural gas. The oil and gas content of the Barents Sea and the Kara Sea alone is estimated at 50-60 billion tons of standard fuel (Russia's annual production of oil and gas equals no more than one billion tons of standard fuel). By way of comparison, the widely publicized reserves of the Caspian Sea amount to 10-12 billion tons of standard fuel.

However, access to the North's wealth depends on enormous long-term efforts by the state with due account of an entire spectrum of problems ranging from financial and economic problems to social and life conditions. From its very inception the Soviet Union made a lot of efforts to develop the North by providing adequate funding, and they did pay off. For instance, from the 60s to the 80s of last century its export of West-Siberian oil alone fetched 400-500 billion dollars. The Magadan Region ensured the country's might in terms of international reserves by supplying nearly one third of the world's gold production during 1932-1994. Today the North accounts for 50-60 percent of Russia's foreign trade turnover and supplies foreign currency to pay for the enormous imports of commodities needed by the country's industry and agriculture.

But the North is not just a treasure of natural resources. The shortest line of communications between the Atlantic ports of northern Europe and the ports of Japan, China and other Asian countries is the Northern Maritime Route (NMR), which runs along the Russian coast of the Arctic Ocean. Ships sailing from St. Petersburg to Vladivostok via the NMR save 9,000 kilometers as distinct from those going via the Suez Canal. Besides, the NMR makes it possible for the Russian Navy to maneuver between the Atlantic and Pacific Theaters of Military Operations, a factor of crucial strategic importance. (1) The shortest air routes link America to Europe and Asia via the North Pole. Foreign ships piloted by Russian icebreakers and other infrastructure systems along the NMR and support for air traffic in Russia's air space may significantly replenish the country's treasury.

Russia stands to benefit from the northern region in other ways too. The region's importance should grow as a result of continuous scientific surveys there, which is the principal prerequisite for the region's effective development today, let alone the future. Such surveys are unlikely to be resumed soon although they were the hallmark of Soviet oceanography and the Soviet research fleet. Meanwhile, some problems are already clamoring for recognition. For example, Russia has a real chance to establish an external boundary of the continental shelf in the eastern part of its polar domain all the way to the North Pole. This would shore up Russia's sovereign right to prospect for and develop natural resources on a 1.5 million square km. shelf and increase its oil and gas potential by 15-20 billion tons of standard fuel. For that to happen, it is necessary to compete the surveys conducted in the early 1990s and submit documentation substantiating Russia's rights to a UN commission. In accordance with the UN Convention on Maritime Law the documentation should be submitted within ten years of Russia's ratification of the Convention in 1997. Should a foreign oil and gas company start production before Russia gains a foothold in regions of its interests, further haste might prove useless, especially considering that Canada, Norway, Denmark and especially the United States are already laying claim to the Arctic shelf.

Other pressing problems include the need to delineate a disputed area between Russia and Norway at the site of the very rich Fedynsk oil and gas field in the central part of the Barents Sea. Russo-Norwegian relations over Spitsbergen are quite tense. Every effort is being made to oust Russia from there.

The future of the NMR is not cloudless either. As has been said before, it has been a Russian national strategic line of communications since it was launched. As soon as it was opened to foreign ships in 1991 there were calls for the NMR to be given the status of an international shipping lane. An international symposium to that effect was held in Tokyo in 1995. The United States, Germany, Norway and China are actively engaged in the study of physical and geographic conditions on the route. It is obvious that preparations are being made to set up an international consortium with predominantly foreign capital for the operation of the NMR. In the near future Russia might even have to pay for the right of Russian ship to use the route instead of benefiting from it commercially.

Areas in the Bering Sea have not been delineated with the United States yet. An agreement signed by Soviet Foreign Minister Shevardnadze and his U.S. counterpart Baker in 1990 deprived Russia of a considerable part of the Bering Sea bottom rich in oil and gas and also a water area convenient for productive fishing. The agreement was due to come into force after its ratification. Being aware of the fact that it served its interests, the U.S. Congress ratified it without delay. Regrettably, the Bering Sea was not among Russia's priorities at the time. When at long last the State Duma got down to considering the agreement in 1996, it refused to ratify it after it saw its illegitimate and defective character. In February 1999 the State Duma again refused to ratify it and passed a resolution intended to restore Russia's rights. Today the Americans are making active efforts to assimilate the illegitimate acquisition. The main legal argument is that ships of the U.S. Coast Guard seize Russian trawlers trying to fish in the area in question. This serves as another reminder of the fact that in the modern world he who is strong is right rather than he who pins hopes on universal "values."

Generally speaking, some quarters are out to take advantage of Russia's temporary economic and military weakness in a clear effort to curtail Russia's presence in the Arctic region. Our "friends" are pursuing two strategic goals: first, undermine Russia's economy still further and, second, open up the Arctic Ocean as a potential springboard for strikes at Russian territory involving nuclear-powered submarines carrying cruise and ballistic missiles in the event of a military conflict. It should also be borne in mind that under the terms of the START-2 Treaty ratified by Russia, this country has the right to deploy 50% of its strategic nuclear potential aboard nuclear-powered submarine missile-carriers. Most of them are incorporated into the Northern Fleet, and the zone of their operations is the Arctic region. Destroying them in the event of a war as a matter of priority is one of the main tasks of the U.S. Navy and NATO.

The United States is engaged in the most vigorous exploration and development of the Arctic region. It accounts for 90% of the funds spent by foreign countries on the exploration of the Arctic Ocean. The U.S. Arctic program pursued in 1996-2001 is a component part of the Federal program for the exploration and development of the World Ocean. Arctic surveys involve twelve Federal government departments and other agencies and some thirty universities and other research institutions. In 1995-1999 the United States implemented Skysacks, a broad program to study the Arctic region with the help of nuclear-powered submarines carrying scientific equipment. During that period four submarines visited the Arctic region on five occasions to spend a total of about six months there. The U.S. Navy Secretary visited one of the submarines in 1999 when it was operating in the Chuckchee Sea, and in 1993 U.S. Vice President Gore took part in a cruise to the Arctic. Top-ranking officials participating in Arctic cruises by nuclear-powered submarines highlight the importance of the work being conducted in the area.2 Today nuclear-powered submarines are the most effective instrument of research in the Arctic basin.

The Soviet Navy accumulated a rich experience transferring diesel submarines and other vessels along the Northern Maritime Route. With the development of nuclear-powered submarines, they began operating under the ice of the central Arctic on an increasing scale in fulfillment of various missions. The experience gained during all those cruises is a substantial contribution to Arctic exploration and development.

The first attempt to transfer three medium diesel submarines from the Northern Fleet to the Pacific Fleet in the post-war period was undertaken in 1949. They failed to cover the route within the space of one navigation because of a difficult ice situation and inadequate experience. The submarines spent the winter in Tiksi Bay and reached Vladivostok the following year. Another group consisting of three similar Northern Fleet submarines left base in the town of Polyarny in early July 1950. The group skirted Novaya Zemlya from the north without icebreaker support and spent several days at the port of Dixon (I myself took part in the cruise as a young lieutenant serving as navigator aboard one of the submarines). The group was then piloted by a linear icebreaker until it reached clear water in the Chuckchi Sea. On the whole the cruise under ice came off without a hitch although tragedy could have struck in the Vilkitsky Strait where the icebreaker came to a halt to raise stream in the boilers after making its way through heavy ice. The submarines following in its wake came to a halt too. All of a sudden the ice began shifting, and the submarines found themselves in an ice trap. It took only a minute for the submarines' hulls to sink under the ice while their light bridges were still visible. Another thrust from the ice, even a weak one, would have crushed the bridges, and the submarines with their topmost hatches open (it was impossible to close them because of the ice) would have found themselves under the ice. I hate to imagine what might have happened after that. What saved the situation was that at that moment the ice stopped shifting. In that emergency they quickly raised steam on the icebreaker, and it went alongside the submarines to avert a possible new attack by the ice. Emergency measures succeeded in returning the ice-covered subs to normalcy. On September 30 the submarines moored at Vladivostok where they were welcomed by the crews of submarines which had arrived there a week earlier after starting from the North a year before. That useful experience helped a lot in organizing subsequent cruises along the Northern Maritime Route by large numbers of surface ships and submarines.

My second experience in a similar cruise took place in the summer of 1957 when I was in command of an oceangoing diesel submarine of Design 611, one of the most advanced submarines of the time. The special-purpose expedition was designed to transfer ships to the Far East that same year and consisted of five squadrons. Two of them constituted a submarine force: 17 medium diesel subs of Design 613, two oceangoing subs of Design 611 and two depot ships. Piloting such an armada was a difficult task because of a very harsh ice situation. At one point executives of the Northern Maritime route even suggested that the convoy spend the winter in an uninhabited bay on Taimyr. The situation was even more complicated in view of the fact that there was no going back because of nuclear tests on Novaya Zemlya. However, everything worked out in the end, but passions had been running high indeed. We reached Kamchatka on October 7. On that occasion pilotage and all types of support were much better organized than in 1950--the experience gained then had not been in vain.

K-3, the pioneer of the Soviet nuclear-powered submarine fleet, carried out the first mission under the ice in November 1959. The submarine had to return to base, though, after the periscope was damaged because of lack of experience and a faulty design of instruments monitoring the ice situation. But that experience was valuable in that it demonstrated that nuclear-powered submarines could and would perform missions under the ice! On July 17, 1962, K-3 reached the North Pole after all and surfaced close to it. The Soviet flag was hoisted on an ice floe. In September 1963 the nuclear-powered submarine K-115 (Design 627, commander--Captain 2nd rank I.R. Dubyaga) for the first time ever covered the distance from the Northern Fleet to the Pacific Fleet under the ice. Ten days later it was followed by K-178 (Design 658, commander--Captain 2nd rank A.P. Mi-khailovsky), which surfaced several times among ice during the route, including two emersions near Soviet drifting stations SP-10 and SP-12. On September 29, 1963, K-181 (Design 627, commander--Captain 2nd rank Yu.A. Sysoyev) surfaced in the region of the North Pole. All three commanders were awarded the title of Hero of the Soviet Union for those missions. They marked the start of an active and systematic opening-up of the Arctic seas by Soviet nuclear-powered submarines.

In 1978, when I was commander of a flotilla of nuclear-powered submarines of the Northern Fleet, I was put in charge of a cruise by a submarine unit from the North to the Far East under the ice of the central Artic region, the first cruise of its kind in the history of the Soviet Navy. Many separate cruises under the ice had been carried out by that time to become a Navy routine.

In early 1978 the flotilla received orders to get two missile-carrying nuclear-powered submarines of Design 670 ready for a cruise to the Pacific Fleet. Subs of this design had a displacement of 6,000 tons, a submergence depth of over 300 meters and were capable of an underwater speed of up to 26 knots (about 48 km/hour). They were armed with eight sea-launched anti-shipping missiles and a torpedo unit. The crew consisted of 90 men. The distinguishing feature of the submarines was that they had only one nuclear reactor whereas other modifications of Soviet subs had two. In accordance with plans drawn up earlier, the first submarine would cover the designated distance and surface in clear water. Only then would the second sub be allowed to leave base. Meanwhile, various forces and means of support, i.e., ships, aircraft, reserve crews and the like, would be ready to deal with possible emergency situations.

The flotilla's headquarters took the initiative to supplement the plan with a scheme according to which the submarines would be part of a group maintaining underwater communications, with the group's commander stationed aboard one of the subs directing the operation. This would half the operation's duration and cost. Besides, if the nuclear-powered submarines were to operate on their own, an emergency in one of the reactors under the ice would make the sub's situation quite difficult (indeed, almost hopeless) because the storage battery would supply energy to the electric motors and repair work for only a limited period of time. If, however, the subs operated as part of a group, the second sub might help in spotting a water opening making it possible for the first one to surface or else make an ice lane by exploding torpedoes. A joint operation would make for a more accurate navigation, which is crucial to navigation in high latitudes. The morale factor was just as important. It is obvious that joint underwater navigation would call for better standards of training for the crews and proper documentation so that it could subsequently be put to the test at sea. Such documentation drawn up by the flotilla's headquarters had shown its worth in the course of training exercises and cruises, including a 1974 cruise when a detachment of three surface ships and two nuclear-powered submarines navigated through the Atlantic, Indian and Pacific Oceans all the way to the Far East.

I received orders to take charge of the group and oversee the entire operation. Captain 1st rank (later Rear-Admiral) Ye.A. Tomko, division commander, was put in charge of the second submarine. The commanders of the submarines were Captain 2nd rank V.R Lushin and Captain 3rd rank A.A. Gusev.

In the early morning of August 22, 1978, both ships left base, and as soon as they reached the sea, they submerged before embarking on their route. It took them two days to reach the ice edge where each of the subs navigated under the ice to test instruments and mechanisms in real conditions. As it turned out, they had demonstrated an almost fault-free performance, and once we sent a report to the headquarters of the North Fleet, we received permission to go under the ice coupled with traditional good wishes for a safe voyage. In the afternoon of August 26 the submarines went down to designated depths and swung into a line abreast. The main phase of the navigation had begun. The ships' mutual position in formation was controlled by sonar instruments. The distance between the ships was kept within 2-4 km. The submergence depth varied from 40 to 200 meters depending on the probability of encountering icebergs. Each of the subs was assigned its own depth echelon to ensure a safe navigation. A sonar telephone was used to maintain communications. Depths, ice thickness, temperatures and the salinity and density of outboard water were continuously monitored all along the route. All parameters characterizing navigation conditions and the work of the submarines' systems and mechanisms were carefully recorded. Special attention was given to measures preventing a fire since during underwater navigation, let alone navigation under ice, anything igniting anywhere in a nuclear-powered submarine creates the most dangerous emergency situation. On the whole the mission was trouble-free--it confirmed the correctness of preliminary plans and a high degree of the equipment's reliability and the crews' professionalism.

Around noon on September 1 both submarines surfaced close to a standby icebreaker in a designated area of the Chuckchee Sea after covering some 3,500 kilometers under ice. In a report sent to our superiors we said the main phase of the cruise had been completed, then we received congratulations, took in a bit of fresh Arctic air and headed for the Bering Strait in surface condition. The strait is too shallow for submerged navigation. Obviously, it can be crossed underwater, but this was not necessary in our case. The Bering Sea welcomed us with stormy weather. The submarines submerged and headed for Kamchatka together just as they had been doing until then.

In the morning of September 8 they moored at the piers of a submarine flotilla where they were to join the Pacific Fleet. An official citation said the submarines' commanders, the division commander and the commanding officer in charge of the mission had been awarded the title of Hero of the Soviet Union for "the successful fulfillment of a special mission assigned by the commanders and the courage and bravery displayed therewith." Regrettably, both commanders are no longer alive. They certainly deserve eternal glory and remembrance.

Exactly a year later a multi-purpose nuclear-powered submarine set out for the North Pole. The aim was to test the capabilities of the submarine of a new design operating under Arctic ice and continue exploring the navigation region around the pole. This time too I was put in charge of the mission. We spotted a suitable ice lane close to the pole, and on September 1 surfaced there without difficulty. Having fulfilled a designated program of operations and admired to our hearts' content the primordial beauty of the Arctic unharmed by civilization, we submerged and crossed the pole once again. It occurred to me that 29 years before when I was navigator aboard a diesel submarine on the first Arctic mission, I could not have imagined a situation where a submarine would surface at the North Pole in that matter-of-fact and even routine manner! I felt proud of my country and its people and navy.

The experience gained then made it possible for groups of nuclear-powered submarines to fulfill several missions under the ice in the Arctic region, which paved the way for making wide use of nuclear-powered submarines to tackle numerous tasks in the Arctic. In principle, it is possible to create underwater container carriers for a speedy delivery of important cargoes from the Pacific Ocean basin to European ports and back, underwater drilling stations for the development of oil and gas fields on the shelf of the Arctic Ocean, underwater tankers and much else. Such an approach would keep the country's dying submarine-building industry afloat, something that is easy to ruin but difficult to revive. It is obvious that projects of this magnitude could only be shouldered by a strong state with wise leaders who are well aware of the country's national interests and act accordingly.

NOTES:

1. Voenno-morskoi entsiklopedicheskii slovar, Voenizdat Publishers, Moscow, 2003, p. 742.

2. For more detail, see: M.V. Motsak, "O natsionalnykh interesakh Rossii v Arktike," Voenna-ia mysl', No 6, 2000; V.I. Danilin, "Chto nuzhno amerikantsam PLA v Arktike," Morskoi sbornik, No 1, 2000.

Rear Admiral R.A. GOLOSOV (Ret)

Hero of the Soviet Union, Candidate of Military Sciences

Rudolf Alexandrovich GOLOSOV was born in the village of Ustiye, Tver Region, on November 14, 1927. Education: preparatory naval school (1945), Frunze Higher Naval School (1949), Naval Academy (1965), Military Academy of General Headquarters (1971). Service: North and Pacific Fleets--all commanding and staff positions in submarine force from navigator of diesel submarine to commander of flotilla of nuclear-powered submarines. Chief of Staff, Pacific Fleet (1980-1983), head of chair of naval operational art of Military Academy of General Headquarters (1983-1990). Author of over 70 research works. Participant in several unique submarine missions, including first joint mission by group of Soviet nuclear-powered submarines from North Fleet to Pacific Fleet under Arctic ice in 1978.

* These and subsequent figures relating to territory, reserves, and the quantitative characteristics of the natural and energy resources produced in the Arctic regions are cited from: G. Agarang, V. Kotliakov, "Sever--zerkalo mirovykh i rossiiskikh problem," SShA: ekonomika, politika i ideologiia, No. 12, 1996.