imiМеждународная аналитикаJournal of International Analytics2587-84762541-9633MGIMO University10.46272/2587-8476-2026-17-2-139-155imi-718Research ArticleИССЛЕДОВАТЕЛЬСКИЕ СТАТЬИRESEARCH ARTICLESМалые «арктические сверхдержавы»: технологические компетенции в Арктике как символический капитал в стратегических культурах Норвегии и ФинляндииSmall “Arctic Superpowers”: Technological Capabilities in the A rctic as Symbolic Capital in the Strategic Cultures of Norway and FinlandЛипуновН. СLipunovN. S.

Никита Сергеевич Липунов, младший научный сотрудник

119454, Москва, пр-т Вернадского, 76

Nikita S. Lipunov, Junior Research Fellow, Institute for International Studies

76, Vernadsky avenue, Moscow, 119454

n.lipunov@inno.mgimo.ruИМИ МГИМО МИД РоссииРоссияMGIMO-UniversityRussian Federation202617082026172139155Copyright © Липунов Н.С., 20262026Липунов Н.С.Lipunov N.S.Данная работа распространяется под лицензией Creative Commons Attribution 4.0.This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.https://www.interanalytics.org/jour/article/view/718

В статье рассматривается влияние технологических компетенций в Арктике на союзнический статус Норвегии и Финляндии в восприятии США. В условиях обострения междержавной конкуренции за лидерство в освоении Арктики, особенно в области технологий ледоколостроения и связи, западные государства активно развивают арктические компетенции. Не последнюю роль в этом процессе играют малые северные государства – Норвегия и Финляндия, которые позиционируют себя как «арктические сверхдержавы» и используют свой многолетний опыт освоения Севера, чтобы занять уникальные ниши в технологических цепочках НАТО и укрепить отношения со своим главным гарантом безопасности – США. Технологические компетенции в Арктике выступают символическим капиталом Норвегии и Финляндии и конвертируются в особый союзнический статус в глазах лидера военно-политического блока – Соединенных Штатов. На фоне обострения ситуации в области военно-политической безопасности в Евроарктическом регионе в 2020-х гг. оба государства развивают технологическое сотрудничество с США в области космических и спутниковых технологий (Норвегия) и ледоколостроения (Финляндия) в рамках специализированных форматов. Помимо военно-политических и экономических выгод институционализированное сотрудничество с США воспринимается северными государствами как статусный маркер и лишь повышает их союзнический статус в восприятии Штатов, делая их незаменимыми партнерами для усиления западного присутствия и влияния в Арктике. В свою очередь, повышение статуса в глазах ключевого гаранта безопасности укрепляет у правящих элит Норвегии и Финляндии ощущение защищенности и может рассматриваться как один из инструментов их политики в области безопасности и элемент стратегической культуры. Результаты исследования подтверждают высокое значение категорий символического капитала и статуса для стратегической культуры малых арктических государств и их политики в области безопасности.

The article examines the impact of technological capabilities in the Arctic on the perception of Norway and Finland as allies by the United States. Against a backdrop of intensifying international competition for leadership in the development of the Arctic, particularly in the fields of icebreaker technology and communications, Western nations are actively developing their Arctic capabilities. Small Nordic states – Norway and Finland – play a significant role in this process, positioning themselves as “Arctic superpowers” and using their long-standing experience of developing the North to occupy unique niches in NATO’s technological supply chains and strengthen relations with their primary security guarantor – the US Technological capabilities in the Arctic serve as symbolic capital for Norway and Finland and translate into a special allied status in the eyes of the leader of the military and political bloc – the United States. Against the backdrop of the escalating military and political security situation in the Euro-Arctic region in the 2020s, both states are developing technological cooperation with the US in the fields of space and satellite technologies (Norway) and icebreaker construction (Finland) within the framework of specialized formats. In addition to the military, political and economic benefits, institutionalized cooperation with the US is viewed by the Nordic states as a status symbol and only serves to enhance their standing as allies in the eyes of the US, making them indispensable partners for strengthening the West’s presence and influence in the Arctic. In turn, this enhanced status in the eyes of the key security guarantor reinforces the sense of security among the ruling elites of Norway and Finland and can be viewed as one of the instruments of their security policy and an element of strategic culture. The findings of the study confirm the high significance of the categories of symbolic capital and status for the strategic cultures of certain small Arctic states and their security policies.

Символический капиталстатусстратегическая культурамалые государстваНорвегияФинляндияСШАSymbolic capitalstatusstrategic culturesmall statesNorwayFinlandthe United StatesИсследование проведено при финансовой поддержке РНФ в рамках проекта №20-78-10159 «Феномен стратегической культуры в мировой политике: специфика влияния на политику безопасности (на примере Скандинавско-Балтийского региона)».This research was conducted with financial support from the Russian Science Foundation as part of project No. 20-78-10159, “The Phenomenon of Strategic Culture in World Politics: Specifics of Its Influence on Security Policy (The Case of the Scandinavian-Baltic Region).”ReferencesАлексеева, Т.А. Стратегическая культура: эволюция концепции // Полис. Политические исследования. 2012. № 5. С. 130–145.Alekseeva, Tatyana A. “Strategic Culture: Evolution of the Concept.” Polis. Political Studies, no. 5 (2012): 130–145 [In Russian].Белухин, Н.Е., Воротников, В.В., Дианина, С.Ю. Репутация и статус в стратегической культуре Дании // Балтийский регион. 2023. Т. 15. № 3. С. 4–28. https://doi.org/10.5922/2079-8555-2023-3-1.Belukhin, Nikita E., Vladislav V. Vorotnikov, and Svetlana Yu. Dianina. “Reputation and Status in Denmark’s Strategic Culture.” Baltic Region 15, no. 3 (2023): 4–28. https://doi.org/10.5922/2079-8555-2023-3-1 [In Russian].Beaumont, Paul, and Pål Røren. “Status Symbols in World Politics.” Cooperation and Conflict 60, no. 1 (2025): 3–26. https://doi.org/10.1177/00108367241311072.Beaumont, Paul, and Pål Røren. “Status Symbols in World Politics.” Cooperation and Conflict 60, no. 1 (2025): 3–26. https://doi.org/10.1177/00108367241311072.Blomquist, Kayla. “Racing for Recognition? Theorizing Emerging Status Hierarchies and Prestige Competition in the AI Era.” International Affairs 102, no. 3 (2026): 949–970. https://doi.org/10.1093/ia/iiag028.Blomquist, Kayla. “Racing for Recognition? Theorizing Emerging Status Hierarchies and Prestige Competition in the AI Era.” International Affairs 102, no. 3 (2026): 949–970. https://doi.org/10.1093/ia/iiag028.Bourdieu, Pierre. “The Specificity of the Scientific Field and the Social Conditions of the Progress of Reason.” Social Science Information 14, no. 6 (1975): 19–47.Bourdieu, Pierre. “The Specificity of the Scientific Field and the Social Conditions of the Progress of Reason.” Social Science Information 14, no. 6 (1975): 19–47.Bourdieu, Pierre. Language and Symbolic Power. Edited by John B. Thompson. Translated by Gino Raymond and Matthew Adamson. Cambridge: Polity Press, 1991.Bourdieu, Pierre. Language and Symbolic Power. Edited by John B. Thompson. Translated by Gino Raymond and Matthew Adamson. Cambridge: Polity Press, 1991.Bourdieu, Pierre. Practical Reason: On the Theory of Action. Cambridge: Polity Press, 1998.Bourdieu, Pierre. Practical Reason: On the Theory of Action. Cambridge: Polity Press, 1998.de Carvalho, Benjamin, and Iver B. Neumann. “Introduction: Small States and Status.” In Small State Status Seeking: Norway’s Quest for International Standing, edited by Benjamin de Carvalho and Iver B. Neumann, 1–21. London: Routledge, 2015.de Carvalho, Benjamin, and Iver B. Neumann. “Introduction: Small States and Status.” In Small State Status Seeking: Norway’s Quest for International Standing, edited by Benjamin de Carvalho and Iver B. Neumann, 1–21. London: Routledge, 2015.Fomin, Ivan. “Strategic Culture as a Meaning-Making System: Towards a Social Semiotic Account of Multimodal Cultural Constraints in International Relations.” International Theory 15, no. 3 (2023): 351–378. https://doi.org/10.1017/S175297192300009X.Fomin, Ivan. “Strategic Culture as a Meaning-Making System: Towards a Social Semiotic Account of Multimodal Cultural Constraints in International Relations.” International Theory 15, no. 3 (2023): 351–378. https://doi.org/10.1017/S175297192300009X.Glenn, John. “Realism versus Strategic Culture: Competition and Collaboration?” International Studies Review 11, no. 3 (2009): 523–551. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2486.2009.00872.x.Glenn, John. “Realism versus Strategic Culture: Competition and Collaboration?” International Studies Review 11, no. 3 (2009): 523–551. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2486.2009.00872.x.Græger, Nina. “From ‘Forces for Good’ to ‘Forces for Status’? Small State Military Status-Seeking.” In Small State Status Seeking: Norway’s Quest for International Standing, edited by Benjamin de Carvalho and Iver B. Neumann, 86–107. London and New York: Routledge, 2015.Græger, Nina. “From ‘Forces for Good’ to ‘Forces for Status’? Small State Military Status-Seeking.” In Small State Status Seeking: Norway’s Quest for International Standing, edited by Benjamin de Carvalho and Iver B. Neumann, 86–107. London and New York: Routledge, 2015.Lamazhapov, Erdem. “Polar Regions for Global Status: China’s Great Power Discourse and Status-Seeking Practice in the Arctic and Antarctic.” The British Journal of Politics and International Relations 28, no. 2 (2026): 718–747. https://doi.org/10.1177/13691481251378895.Lamazhapov, Erdem. “Polar Regions for Global Status: China’s Great Power Discourse and Status-Seeking Practice in the Arctic and Antarctic.” The British Journal of Politics and International Relations 28, no. 2 (2026): 718–747. https://doi.org/10.1177/13691481251378895.Larson, Deborah Welch, T.V. Paul, and William C. Wohlforth. “Status and World Order.” In Status in World Politics, edited by T.V. Paul, Deborah Welch Larson, and William C. Wohlforth, 3–30. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2014.Larson, Deborah Welch, T.V. Paul, and William C. Wohlforth. “Status and World Order.” In Status in World Politics, edited by T.V. Paul, Deborah Welch Larson, and William C. Wohlforth, 3–30. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2014.Matala, Saara. “Finnish Icebreaker Diplomacy in the Cold War: Ships of Security, Prestige, and Welfare.” In Technological Innovation, Globalization and the Cold War: A Transnational History, edited by Wolfgang Mueller, and Petra Svik, 116–133. London: Routledge, 2023.Matala, Saara. “Finnish Icebreaker Diplomacy in the Cold War: Ships of Security, Prestige, and Welfare.” In Technological Innovation, Globalization and the Cold War: A Transnational History, edited by Wolfgang Mueller, and Petra Svik, 116–133. London: Routledge, 2023.Pedersen, Rasmus Brun. “Jumping on the Bandwagon: Status Seeking as a Driver for Sweden’s Involvement in NATO-Led Operations?” International Politics 57, no. 1 (2020): 41–56. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41311-019-00175-x.Pedersen, Rasmus Brun. “Jumping on the Bandwagon: Status Seeking as a Driver for Sweden’s Involvement in NATO-Led Operations?” International Politics 57, no. 1 (2020): 41–56. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41311-019-00175-x.Røren, Pål. “Status Seeking in the Friendly Nordic Neighborhood.” Cooperation and Conflict 54, no. 4 (2019): 562–579. https://doi.org/10.1177/0010836719828410.Røren, Pål. “Status Seeking in the Friendly Nordic Neighborhood.” Cooperation and Conflict 54, no. 4 (2019): 562–579. https://doi.org/10.1177/0010836719828410.Sundlisæter, Tale, and Gjert Lage Dyndal. Space Power in the High North: Norway’s Arctic Space Strategy (Unscripted). Oslo: Cappelen Damm Akademisk, 2025. https://doi.org/10.23865/cdf.256.Sundlisæter, Tale, and Gjert Lage Dyndal. Space Power in the High North: Norway’s Arctic Space Strategy (Unscripted). Oslo: Cappelen Damm Akademisk, 2025. https://doi.org/10.23865/cdf.256.Willis, Jeffrey. “Breaking the Paradigm(s): A Review of the Three Waves of International Relations Small State Literature.” Pacific Dynamics: Journal of Interdisciplinary Research 5, no. 1 (2021): 18–32. https:// doi.org/10.26021/10638.Willis, Jeffrey. “Breaking the Paradigm(s): A Review of the Three Waves of International Relations Small State Literature.” Pacific Dynamics: Journal of Interdisciplinary Research 5, no. 1 (2021): 18–32. https:// doi.org/10.26021/10638.Wilson Rowe, Elana. “Arctic Hierarchies? Norway, Status and the High North.” Polar Record 50, no. 1 (2014): 72–79. https://doi.org/10.1017/S003224741200054X.Wilson Rowe, Elana. “Arctic Hierarchies? Norway, Status and the High North.” Polar Record 50, no. 1 (2014): 72–79. https://doi.org/10.1017/S003224741200054X.Wohlforth, William C. “The Irony of Prestige: Status-Seeking as Rational Choice.” Cooperation and Conflict 60, no. 1 (2025): 193–209. https://doi.org/10.1177/00108367241302453.Wohlforth, William C. “The Irony of Prestige: Status-Seeking as Rational Choice.” Cooperation and Conflict 60, no. 1 (2025): 193–209. https://doi.org/10.1177/00108367241302453.

The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest present.