National Defense reviews the current state of the US Coast Guard’s icebreaker fleet. There is probably nothing here we haven’t already heard, but it did include a question and answer with the Commandant that, as reported, might give the wrong impression,

“So, as a nation, we have one heavy icebreaker,” she said.

This led to the follow-up question of how many does Russia operate?

“Way more than one. It’s close to 40,” she said. Russia operates the world’s only fleet of nuclear-powered icebreakers.

I think the Commandant was saying the Russians have about 40 icebreakers, not 40 heavy icebreakers.

The Russians do have the largest fleet of heavy icebreakers. Table B-1, page 51, of the Congression Research Service’s “Coast Guard Polar Security Cutter (Polar Icebreaker) Program: Background and Issues for Congress” dated November 19, 2024, indicates that as of April 4, 2022, Russia had 51 icebreakers (36 Government owned or operated and 15 Privately owned or operated), but only six operational icebreakers were classed PC1, PC2 or equivalent. The only other operational icebreaker with these characteristics was USCGC Polar Star. The Russians were reported to have 31 medium icebreakers classed PC3 or PC4 and 14 light icebreakers classed PC5 or PC6.

Only Russia and the US operate what the US Coast Guard would call a heavy icebreaker. Of the 104 icebreakers listed, from 20 countries, only 7 would be considered heavy icebreakers by the USCG.

Healy and Storis (formerly Aiviq) are considered medium icebreakers and Nathanirl B. Palmer and Sikuliaq are considered light icebreakers.

Clearly medium and light icebreakers have a role. Not every mission requires over 45,000 HP. The highly successful Wind class would now be considered light icebreakers and USCGC Glacier would barely qualify as a medium icebreaker. Sometimes smaller size is actually an advantage. There are probably places where two medium icebreakers might be preferable to only one heavy icebreaker, if only to provide a degree of redundancy.

So why aren’t we building some medium icebreakers? We know there is a stated Coast Guard has a requirement for nine icebreakers and four or five are expected to be medium icebreakers. So why haven’t we at least started the procurement process for those medium icebreakers? So far not even a Request for Proposal.

If we use the current approach, we are probably not going to see the first new Arctic Security Cutter (medium icebreaker) until 2035 even if the process starts now.

The Icebreaker Collaboration Effort, or ICE Pact may provide another way. Hopefully the US and Canadian Coast Guards could get together to come up with a set of requirements and optional enhancements both could agree on and ask the Finnish partners to detailed design a medium icebreaker that would be welcomed by both services. It the final design is acceptable, have the Finnish yard build the prototype. It successful then determine where follow on ships should be built.

This isn’t a short process, but it does not get shorter if we wait to start. A prototype built quickly in Finland would allow the proof of concept testing the GAO keeps telling the Coast Guard that they should do before building the second and later ships of a class.

If the Congress and Administration actually feel any urgency for additional presence in the Arctic, the Coast Guard should try to offer them a shortcut.