Donald Trump Wants More Icebreaker Ships. Can America Afford Them?

President Trump is pushing the United States to purchase “about 40 icebreakers.” Of course, paying for such a fleet in the near future would be exceedingly difficult.

The big news in military contracting over the past week has been Boeing’s win over Lockheed for the Air Force’s Next Generation Air Dominance (NGAD) fighter, now dubbed the F-47—and the upcoming award of the Navy’s F/A-XX program, either to Boeing or to Northrop Grumman. But more quietly, without the fanfare, the U.S. Coast Guard handed out a hefty contract of its own—nearly $1 billion to Bollinger Shipyards for a heavy icebreaker program.

The contract, worth $951 million, will be crucial in allowing the United States to operate in the High North, an area of increasing strategic importance. The timing of the contract happens to coincide with President Trump’s calls for an augmented icebreaker fleet, part of the Coast Guard’s Polar Security Cutter (PSC) program. It also happens to coincide with the President’s suggestion that the U.S. annex Greenland—and Vice President JD Vance’s highly-publicized visit to the island.

Breaking the Ice

With only two operational vessels, America’s current icebreaker fleet is underwhelming. The Coast Guard owns both vessels, the heavy icebreaker Polar Star and the medium icebreaker Healy. Both ships are approaching the end of their service lives (the Polar Star was commissioned in 1976, while the Healy was commissioned in 2000).

But even with both vessels operational, the U.S. has a strategic gap when it comes to Arctic operations. In the past, the Arctic was not a strategic priority. But with the ice caps melting, new sea lanes opening, and new natural resources becoming accessible, the region promises to attract intense geopolitical competition in the coming decades. Although America has the world’s largest military and an advantageous location in the Northern Hemisphere, it is poorly prepared for the upcoming Arctic competition. Indeed, as Sebastian Roblin wrote for Popular Mechanics, ‘Russia Is Absolutely Crushing the U.S. Navy in the Arctic.’ Russia has eight nuclear-powered heavy icebreakers, the largest such fleet in the world, and is building more. Moreover, the Kremlin has upwards of sixty icebreakers/ice-capable patrol ships. Canada, the world’s second largest fleet, has eighteen. America, meanwhile, has only five, fewer than either Finland or Denmark (with ten and seven, respectively).

Trump’s Icebreaker Strategy

President Trump is pushing the United States to purchase “about 40 icebreakers.” Of course, paying for such a fleet in the near future would be exceedingly difficult. The Coast Guard recently estimated the cost of the upcoming lead ship in the PSC program will cost $1.3 billion—but “government auditors suspect that cost will rise due to the complexity and difficulties associated with building a heavy icebreaker,” Breaking Defense reported.

Regardless, the intentions are clear: the United States intends to bridge the strategic gap with respect to Arctic capabilities through greater investment in icebreakers.

According to National Security Council spokesperson Brian Hughes, “President Trump’s statement sends a clear signal to industry and the world that America is serious about maintaining a presence in the Arctic to secure our economic and national security. This administration is prioritizing building icebreakers as part of their initiative to revitalize America’s maritime and shipbuilding industries.” Only time will tell, though, if the future reality matches this rhetoric.

About the Author: Harrison Kass

Harrison Kass is a senior defense and national security writer with over 1,000 total pieces on issues involving global affairs. An attorney, pilot, guitarist, and minor pro hockey player, Harrison joined the US Air Force as a Pilot Trainee but was medically discharged. Harrison holds a BA from Lake Forest College, a JD from the University of Oregon, and an MA from New York University. Harrison listens to Dokken.

Image: Wikimedia Commons.