JULY 31, 2025 – In a region where logistical hurdles, geopolitical tensions, and extreme environmental conditions converge, the Department of Defense is sharpening its operational edge. From July 14 to 18, the Ted Stevens Center for Arctic Security Studies hosted the first-ever Arctic Operational Risk Course (AORC), providing U.S. and Canadian warfighters and security professionals with new tools to anticipate and mitigate risk in one of the world’s most complex operating environments.
The course, a four-day, 28-hour executive education program, was developed to deepen operational preparedness in the Arctic while advancing U.S. homeland defense objectives. Its launch marks a milestone in the center’s educational portfolio— one that emphasizes building a community of practitioners capable of anticipating and managing the distinct risks that define Arctic operations.
“The Arctic Operational Risk Course was created to prepare our warfighters for operating in the Arctic environment, which is vastly different from the Southern climates many have operated in for decades,” said Dr. Haliehana Stepetin, a professor of socioeconomics at the School for Arctic Security Studies and one of the course’s primary developers. “Success in the Arctic requires understanding its unique risks—logistical, environmental, and geopolitical.”
Hosted virtually, the pilot course brought together 36 participants from the U.S. Army, Air Force, Navy, Coast Guard, Canadian Armed Forces, and multiple interagency organizations. Attendees included active-duty personnel and security professionals with expertise in Arctic planning, operations, and homeland defense.
The AORC is built around applied learning: expert-led panels, case studies, and breakout sessions centered on real-world scenarios drawn from Alaska and the broader Arctic region. A capstone exercise challenged participants to assess and communicate risk using assessment tools, requiring them to consider environmental hazards, infrastructure limitations, geopolitical complexities, and human factors.
“We studied historical case scenarios from explorers and industry to learn how to mitigate operational risk,” said Stepetin. “We don’t want to risk lives because we failed to learn from the past.”
One participant echoed the importance of this multidisciplinary, scenario-driven format.
“It was very enlightening,” they said. “What stood out most was how different perspectives came together when approaching a real-world Arctic problem. It forces you to think in ways you haven’t before.”
Another participant noted that while the course assumes a baseline understanding of the Arctic, it excels at drawing out operational insights that are often overlooked.
“At first, the lectures felt familiar because I’d just spent time in Alaska, but the breakout groups really stood out. Hearing from people in other services helped me see the Arctic from entirely different lenses,” they said. “That cross-service and interagency collaboration was eye-opening.”
Stepetin emphasized that while the course is Arctic-specific, the operational risk frameworks taught can be applied globally.
“Developing the skills to assess risk is a practice of leadership,” she said. “It doesn’t have to be the Arctic. These models work whether you’re dealing with the Bering Strait or the South China Sea.”
Strategically, the course supports the DoD’s goals of restoring deterrence and reinforcing maritime dominance in the region. As Stepetin explained, Arctic access often depends on unpredictable ice conditions and a limited logistics network, making maritime risk a central focus.
“Operational risk in the Arctic is multi-domain, but maritime is one of the main domains,” she said. “We’re supporting this broader notion of maritime dominance that’s essential for homeland defense.”
Participants explored scenarios along key Arctic access points like the Bering and Chukchi Seas, where infrastructure is sparse and great power competition is rising. These exercises were designed to simulate whole-of-government responses to threats, ranging from disasters to contested territorial activity.
“We placed the majority of our scenarios in and around Alaska to help participants think through what it takes to defend the homeland and activate interagency capabilities,” Stepetin said.
Feedback from the course has been overwhelmingly positive. Participants praised the academic rigor and the emphasis on critical thinking, though some suggested earlier exposure to the course for junior personnel might yield even greater benefits.
“If someone has only a basic understanding of Arctic operations, this course is a great next step,” one participant said. “It really pushes you to think through every contingency—especially when resources are limited.”
The center plans to expand future offerings, with the next iteration scheduled for December. Organizers aim to open registration more broadly and diversify the expert panels and scenarios.
“We want to grow the course with more participants, more speakers, and new ways to challenge our students,” said Stepetin. “But we’re keeping the focus on applied risk analysis, because that’s what makes this course so effective.”
For the center, the AORC is more than just a curriculum—it’s a commitment to preparing the joint force for an increasingly dynamic Arctic operating environment.
“If you can commit four and a half days to this, it’s going to be well worth your while,” said Stepetin. “Being able to evaluate and mitigate operational risk is critical to the success of any mission—especially in the Arctic.”
Story by Amber Kurka
Ted Stevens Center for Arctic Security Studies