Project 2025 Tracker / What’s done, what’s next

6. Department of State · Notable

Have NATO adopt and implement an Arctic strategy

Partially done

Printed page 189 6. Department of State

“The next Administration should embrace the view that NATO must acknowledge that it is, in part, an Arctic alliance. … NATO must develop and implement an Arctic strategy that recognizes the importance of the region and ensures that Russian use of Arctic waters and resources does not exceed a reasonable footprint.”

What has happened

  1. Partially done

    Checked against NATO's own record for the first time, and it says the same thing more plainly than the U.S. reporting did. NATO's Arctic security topic page — the Alliance's canonical account of what it does in the region — enumerates Arctic Sentry (the enhanced Vigilance Activity launched February 2026, led by Joint Force Command Norfolk), Forward Land Forces Finland (June 2026), Task Force X-Arctic, Iceland Air Policing and the Allied Arctic exercise program. **The word "strategy" does not appear on the page.** Its own summary of the Alliance's Arctic history runs: a presence since 1949, reinforcement in recent years, Finland and Sweden's accession, Arctic Sentry in February 2026, FLF Finland in June 2026 — activities and posture throughout, no adopted document. So the distinction the read queue asked about holds on NATO's own telling: NATO has taken the Arctic on as an alliance mission and has not adopted an Arctic strategy. The ask is "develop and implement an Arctic strategy"; the implementing half is visibly running and the document half is not there, which is what `partial` says.

  2. Partially done

    The Arctic Allies - Canada, the Kingdom of Denmark including Greenland and the Faroe Islands, Finland, Iceland, Norway, Sweden and the United States - jointly recorded support for "NATO's increased presence in the region through activities such as Arctic Sentry, Air Policing in Iceland, and Forward Land Forces Finland, as well as the ongoing strengthening of the Joint Forces Command in Norfolk, a new CAOC in Norway and the ongoing modernization of NORAD", and agreed to deepen Arctic security dialogue. Still short of the adopted-and-implemented Arctic strategy the Quote names: a Federal Register full-text search for the quoted phrase "Arctic strategy" since 2025-01-20 returns 0 documents, and no NATO strategy document is cited in any allowlisted U.S. record.

  3. Partially done

    NATO has taken on the Arctic as an alliance mission without adopting an Arctic strategy document. State's report to Congress records that in January 2026 the President and the NATO Secretary General "agreed that NATO should collectively take more responsibility for the defense of the region given Russia's on-going military activity and China's growing interest", and that in February 2026 the allies launched the enhanced vigilance activity Arctic Sentry, which "strengthens NATO's posture in the Arctic and High North by bringing together NATO and Allied activities into one overarching operational approach". The report describes the U.S. role as encouraging burden-shifting within NATO's 360-degree approach.

Research log

What was searched, and what didn’t count as evidence

Research notes

Every source this Status rests on is allowlisted and was read in full; none of it was off the allowlist or unreadable.

Reviewed 2026-09-06. The open question was whether NATO adopted an Arctic strategy document, as distinct from the Arctic Sentry vigilance activity. nato.int is now allowlisted as Primary about NATO’s own acts, and the answer is no. How far that answer reaches:

  • NATO has rebuilt its site. Its old topic pages are gone, and topic pages now live at new addresses.
  • NATO’s sitemap lists 47,847 URLs, but it covers only news, events and multimedia — no topic pages and no official texts. Searching it for “arctic” finds the news but never the topic page; that came from a link inside a news article.
  • The Official texts index cannot be searched as published. The page loads a filter with no results in the page itself, so it cannot support a negative. The negative recorded here is therefore about NATO’s own Arctic topic page and its dated backgrounder, and it says so; it is not a negative over the whole body of NATO official texts.
  • The Status does not move. Partial is the same level the U.S.-sourced record already carried, and this review replaces an inference (“no NATO strategy document is cited in any allowlisted U.S. record”) with NATO saying it itself.
Action
create
Object
NATO Arctic strategy
ID
508