In late June, the US Coast Guard announced that one of its two premier icebreakers, Polar Star, had entered dry dock to undergo work that will extend its service life. Meanwhile, the Coast Guard’s other icebreaker, Healy, was preparing for its upcoming voyage to patrol the Arctic, Bereaking Defense reports.
Then, disaster: Towards the end of July, Healy suffered an electrical fire, derailing the ship’s planned patrol and forcing it to return to Seattle. And just like that, the entirety of America’s polar icebreaking fleet had been sidelined, hampering its ability to project power and maintain a visible presence in the High North for the foreseeable future.
It’s a worst-case scenario, but the fact the US is on thin ice with its fleet of ships capable of navigating the Arctic has been a concern for a long time — a concern that earlier this summer helped drive the White House to announce a new pact aimed directly at strengthening the icebreaker fleet.
In a July 10 trilateral announcement, the leaders of the United States, Canada and Finland said they will work together to build and buy icebreakers, a type of ship uniquely designed to clear out the kinds of polar ice that would otherwise sink or severely damage unprepared vessels. Under the likely-backronym of the Icebreaker Collaboration Effort Pact, or ICE Pact, the agreement fits into the kind of region-specific, bi- and tri-lateral agreements the Biden administration has pursued in recent years.
But where ICE Pact stands out is its nature as the rare strategic pact in which the United States’ capabilities lag behind that of its partners. For the US, it’s an outreach to two NATO allies, both of whom are highly proficient in polar navigation, for help in a race with Russia and China for a stronger presence in a region that experts have for years predicted will become vital to economic success and national security.
“Our partnerships in the Arctic are unique because there is such a concentration of like-minded and highly capable allies such as Canada and Finland. They have a wealth of experience operating in the Arctic and do so with a high level of proficiency,” Navy Adm. Daryl Caudle, the four-star officer in charge of US Fleet Forces, told Breaking Defense.
“ICE Pact is just another example of how our partnerships with our allies serve as a force multiplier for the United States,” he continued. “By leaning on our partners who have a longer history and deeper expertise in Arctic operations, we are able to adapt and improve our own practices, making our combined efforts even more effective.
During the NATO summit, the three leaders offered only preliminary details about ICE Pact, promising a joint memorandum of understanding would be released later this year outlining future plans. But the agreement reflects how seriously Washington and its allies are taking future transits in and through the High North.
“With climate change, our Arctic is becoming far more accessible,” Canadian Defense Minister Bill Blair said in July, just ahead of the ICE Pact announcement, adding that there are “huge gaps in our security and in our presence” in the Arctic.
“By 2050, the Arctic Ocean could be primary point of transit between Europe and Asia. And as it becomes more accessible, security concerns become, I think, far more significant to us.”
Getting an accurate count of exactly how many icebreakers there are in the world is challenging, due to the fact that “icebreaker” is a much more ambiguous term than “frigate” or “submarine.” Which ships should count largely comes down to a source’s interpretation and context.
For example, the United States owns numerous ships that are called “icebreakers,” but White House statements about ICE Pact disregard vessels that operate solely in the Great Lakes, rather than polar regions. Dozens of Liquified Natural Gas ships built by South Korean industry are capable of polar navigation, but their ability to break ice is secondary to their primary mission, which results in certain sources not counting them. Some sources include ships owned and operated by industry, rather than just those strictly managed by the state.
The US Coast Guard maintains a database of the world’s icebreakers and provided Breaking Defense with a report dated to 2020 outlining those ships. Breaking Defense used that report, supplemented by expert analysis and publicly available documents from the respective governments, to reach the ship counts included in this story.
When it comes to ICE Pact, there are five key countries to consider: The three members of the new trilateral agreement (Finland, Canada and the US) as well as Russia and China, two governments that are antagonistic towards the Western nations, both of which have shown significant interest in Arctic governance and emerging sea routes.
Of those five, Russia is easily in the lead for sheer volume, stating in February that it possessed 41 icebreakers across varying categories. ICE Pact members Canada and Finland operate 20 and 11 icebreakers, respectively. The United States, at 12 — nine of which remain strictly in the Great Lakes region — and China, believed to have at least five, own relatively fewer polar icebreakers given their much bigger navies, but both countries are planning to build new vessels moving forward.
All of which is to say, there is no American supremacy when it comes to this niche sector of shipbuilding, and the United States may have the most to gain in the new pact due to the age and size of its current fleet.
American Ambitions
America’s 12 icebreakers are not operated by the Defense Department. Instead, they are owned by the Coast Guard.
“Even though the U.S. Navy doesn’t own icebreaking ships, we work closely with the U.S. Coast Guard, Canada, and Finland, who do have these capabilities in the arctic,” Caudle said. “These partnerships are crucial, especially in the ‘High North,’ which is our frontline for arctic maritime homeland defense.”
The Coast Guard owns nine icebreakers that remain in the Great Lakes. While these ships are important for keeping that region navigable for both armed forces and civilian commerce, those ships are not suitable for transiting in the arctic. Instead, America on paper is reliant on three polar icebreakers — but even that number is misleading.
The two heavy-class ships Polar Star (WAGB-10) and Polar Sea (WAGB-11), both built in the 1970s, are nearing the end of their useful service lives. Due to a costly engine problem that occurred in 2010, Polar Sea was put into “inactive commission” — meaning it’s not operational, and the service has made clear that’s unlikely to change. The third ship is the Healy (WAGB-20), a newer, more technologically advanced icebreaker built in the 1990s, considered a medium-class vessel.
Making things more complicated for the Coast Guard in the short term is the Healy suffering an electrical fire in July, forcing it to return to port in Seattle, Vice Commandant Adm. Kevin Lunday confirmed during a talk at the Brookings Institution last week. With the Healy forced home and Polar Star in a California dry dock for maintenance work, all three of America’s polar icebreakers are at least temporarily sidelined.
The Coast Guard said in a 2023 study that its ideal mix of vessels is up to nine ships — some medium, some heavy — to fulfill all its Arctic and Antarctic missions, according to a Congressional Research Service report.
To date, the Coast Guard has two initiatives to boost its fleet, separate from ICE Pact. One of its top acquisition priorities, the Polar Security Cutter, is a shipbuilding program aiming to deliver up to three heavy-class ships. PSC’s prime contractor is the Louisiana-based Bollinger Shipyards, which took ownership of the program in 2022 when it acquired Mississippi-based Halter Marine.
The program since inception has seen numerous cost and scheduling issues, but the latest projections show the first ship hitting the water no sooner than 2029 with a price tag that will likely exceed initial estimates of $1.3 billion. In its initial announcement about ICE Pact, the White House said Bollinger would play an integral role in that agreement, but did not elaborate further.
A second, relatively newer initiative, is a request the USCG sent to lawmakers in 2024 asking for $125 million to purchase a commercially available polar icebreaker. That acquisition remains at least $25 million short of proceeding, according to the service’s most recent budget documents.
It’s not yet clear what roles the Pentagon and Coast Guard will have in the execution of ICE Pact. While unveiling the DoD’s new arctic strategy on July 22, and during subsequent public appearances, Iris Ferguson, the senior Pentagon civilian overseeing arctic policy, only said the Defense Department is supportive of the Coast Guard’s efforts to bolster its fleet.
An administration official told Breaking Defense the new pact would be a “whole-of-government project.”
“The U.S. Coast Guard, as well as the broader Department of Homeland Security, the U.S. Maritime Administration, as well as the broader Department of Transportation, the State Department, the Department of Defense and others will all play important roles—the specifics of which are being worked through during the negotiation of the trilateral memorandum of understanding and subsequent implementation phases of the agreement,” the official said.
Rebecca Pincus, director of the Polar Institute at the Wilson Center, a Washington DC-based think tank, wrote that the primary impact of ICE Pact in the short-term is the demonstration of “high-level attention” being paid to the Arctic by the White House and “the credence this lends to efforts to find creative solutions to the broader set of shipbuilding woes.”
“While unlikely to reach the scale and scope of AUKUS, the ICE Pact agreement signifies sustained interest from the Biden administration in partnering with key allies on critical naval technology,” she continued.
Natives Of The North, Canada And Finland’s Reputation Precedes Them
In Canada and Finland, the US has teamed up with two countries that excel at building icebreakers, and for good reason: Their people and economies depend on it. While not every ship included in these counts is necessarily capable of Arctic navigation, they do speak to a shipbuilding proficiency many US shipyards lack.
“One of our absolutely key, vital ports, and sources of commerce comes through the Great Lakes system up through the St. Lawrence River to open markets,” said David Perry, president of the Canadian Global Affairs Institute. “So being able to… have free movement of goods in and out of the Port of Montreal and then to further inland is vital to the Canadian economy.”
The Canadian Coast Guard, which operates its country’s icebreakers, lists 20 vessels as part of the icebreaking fleet, ranging in size from light — and even air-cushioned hovercrafts — to heavy ships.
Perry said the state and age of Canada’s ships vary, but Ottawa has recognized a recapitalization is necessary.
“Right now, we don’t have enough icebreaking assets to be able to keep the kind of reliable access into the Canadian north that we would ideally want, which is why we’re looking to build two modern new icebreakers,” he said.
Canada currently has two programs aimed at revitalizing its icebreaker fleet. Seaspan Shipyards and Chantier Davie, also called Davie Shipbuilding, are under contract to build a new polar icebreaker each, which will be capable of year-round operations in the Arctic. The schedule for when those ships will finish construction has not yet been determined, according to the government.
Earlier this year, Canada also awarded Chantier Davie a contract to begin designing six program icebreakers to replace several medium and heavy-class ships in its Coast Guard’s fleet. The program ships differ from their polar counterparts in that they will be less capable of breaking fresh ice in the High North, but their size and numbers will allow Canada to maintain presence in the St. Lawrence waterways, Great Lakes and Atlantic and Pacific oceans.
In addition to being responsible for most of Canada’s new icebreakers, Chantier Davie also owns Helsinki Shipyard, based in the eponymously named city in Finland. The Canadian company purchased the shipyard’s assets in 2023 from its previous Russian owners when Russia’s invasion of Ukraine had created a contentious relationship between the shipyard and Finnish authorities. Helsinki Shipyard in particular is responsible for a majority of the icebreakers Finland’s shipbuilding industry produces, according to White House data. While it’s unclear what role Chantier Davie and Helsinki Shipyard will play in ICE Pact, the relationship speaks to the existing connections between the two countries’ industrial bases.
In Finland, the US has partnered with a country often touted as the world’s leader in icebreaker production. The Finnish government likes to say that the country designs 80 percent of the world’s icebreakers and manufactures 60 percent — and the state-owned fleet reflects that mastery.
“Super up-to-date and super modern as well. They’re very comfortable to live on,” Jason Moyer, an associate at the Wilson Center focused on transatlantic security issues, said of Finland’s ships. “The Finns are extremely modest. They do not claim to be a superpower in many regards. But this is the one area where they are pretty confident.”
Finland’s fleet is unique compared to the United States and Canada because most of its 11 ships are not operated by the country’s navy or coast guard. Rather, a state-owned company called Arctia operates nine icebreakers, a 10th ship is manned by the Finnish Navy and another is owned by Alfons-Håkans, a private company, according to Moyer and other sources reviewed by Breaking Defense.
One of Finland’s latest additions to its fleet is the Polaris, which was publicly debuted in 2017 during the 100th anniversary of Finnish independence, and it is considered the “pride” of the fleet by the government.
“Completed in 2016 and measuring 110 meters [361 feet] in length, Polaris is the first icebreaker in the world to feature environmentally friendly dual-fuel engines capable of using both low-sulphur marine diesel oil (LSMDO) and liquefied natural gas (LNG), significantly reducing the ship’s CO2 emissions,” according to a Finnish website promoting the city of Helsinki. “As a result, Polaris is considered the most environmentally friendly icebreaker in the world.”
Charly Salonius-Pasternak, a senior research fellow at the Finnish Institute of International Affairs, told Breaking Defense that ICE Pact may also present an opportunity for the Pentagon and US Coast Guard to pick up on the small tips and tricks created by Finnish ingenuity over the years.
“Just because budgets have always been so tight, [the Finnish Navy] have gotten quite adept at figuring out effective, low-cost solutions to things,” he said, citing the problem of how to operate in freezing rain as one example. “Now that Finland is a US ally, this will hopefully be easier to sort out, especially considering that there are other fields where the US and Finland have collaborated in far more sensitive security and defense matters than, frankly, icebreakers.”
When the Pentagon presented its new arctic strategy in late July, it highlighted in detail Russia and China’s interest in advancing their respective Arctic capabilities as well as the fact they are frequently leaning on one another to achieve their goals.
“Increasingly, the [People’s Republic of China] and Russia are collaborating in the Arctic across multiple instruments of national power. While significant areas of disagreement between the PRC and Russia remain, their growing alignment in the region is of concern, and DoD continues to monitor this cooperation,” according to the document. “Russia’s isolation as a result of its full-scale invasion of Ukraine has made it increasingly reliant on the PRC for financing energy export infrastructure in the Arctic.”
The US Coast Guard’s data indicates that as of 2020, Russia’s fleet was just a few ships short of the Moscow’s recent claim of 41 ships, with several vessels under construction. Another extensive icebreaker tracker comes from Aker Arctic, a Finnish shipbuilding firm dating back to the 1930s, which tallied roughly four dozen Russian icebreakers without considering vessels caught in the gray areas — capable of breaking ice but not always used for that purpose.
The ambiguity around what constitutes an “icebreaker” makes comparing these tallies against one another difficult, but there is a clear consensus among sources that Russia has prioritized being able to navigate ice both in polar regions and elsewhere its fleet might be needed.
“Russia’s icebreaking capacity is significant,” said Salonius-Pasternak. “[You] just have to look at the map. They’ve of course had many reasons to keep it up,” referring to the country’s geolocation and the environments its ships must frequently transit.
And with that in mind, the Pentagon’s Arctic strategy warns not to underestimate the country’s ambitions.
“Russia’s maritime infrastructure could allow it to enforce excessive and illegal maritime claims along the Northern Sea Route (NSR) between the Bering Strait and Kara Strait,” according to the document. “Russia claims the right to regulate Arctic waters along the NSR in excess of the authority permitted under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), placing excessive requirements on foreign vessels transiting the route and threatening force against vessels out of compliance with Russian regulations.”
While Russia’s geolocation and membership in the Arctic Council, an international forum for Arctic nations to sort out disagreements, give it explicit and inherent interest in the High North, Chinese ambitions and icebreaker shipbuilding is a more complicated issue for Washington.
In 2017, China claimed to be a “near-arctic state” and has since then sought to insert itself into the governance of both the High North — a claim the US has rejected — as well as the Antarctic, where its claims have greater credibility on the global stage given its geolocation.
China is known to operate at least five icebreakers, not all of which are capable of polar
navigation, and like other countries, certain ships are owned by the state while others are managed by universities. (Pentagon officials contend the line between military and commercial use is less meaningful in the context of the Chinese because, they say, the state will frequently and covertly use assets for dual purposes.)
Beijing has also previously announced it was developing a nuclear-powered icebreaker, but publicly available details about that ship remain scarce. The country’s opacity makes it difficult to track its ships in detail, even for veteran observers.
Elizabeth Buchanan, a senior fellow at the Australian Strategic Policy Institute, told Breaking Defense that China’s proclaimed stake in the arctic stems from its economy and security turning on “the ability to secure unrestrained sea lines of communication and control of global trade.”
“The emerging Northern Sea Route, further bolstered by partnership with Russia in the Far East, North Pacific Ocean and Russia’s Northern Sea Route, connect Beijing to Europe in a much more efficient (time and cost terms) manner,” she said. “Militarizing the route would further ensure supply security and allow China to diversify its reliance on the South China Sea for seaborne trade between Asia and Europe.”
She also argued that the United States’ speedy rejection of China’s “near-arctic state” claim was “risky” because it allows Beijing to criticize Washington for not respecting China’s rights to the high seas.
For the US to secure its own interest in the arctic, she said, it must invest in capabilities to “deter ambitious Chinese behavior” — to include, but not limited to, icebreakers. ICE Pact could offer one pathway to doing that.
“The US [also] needs to bolster diplomatic ties with Arctic neighbors — all of them. Including Russia. An ability to draw Russia back from the brink in terms of its China relationship in the Arctic is crucial,” she said.
Russia’s willingness to formally engage with other countries through the Arctic Council largely stalled in the wake of its invasion into Ukraine and that suspension of diplomacy “opened the door for Moscow” to more heavily rely on other countries, such as China, to fuel its ambitions, Buchanan said.
“There are set to be many cooks in the kitchen when it comes to [the] Arctic’s future,” she added.
