The war between Russia and Ukraine has cast a long shadow far beyond the battlefields, reaching into the icy expanse of the Arctic Circle. Once a beacon of international scientific collaboration, the Arctic is now a silent victim of geopolitical strife, and vital climate research hangs in the balance.

Since the conflict erupted in 2022, Western scientists have been barred from accessing Russian Arctic territories, severing a crucial lifeline for climate data. Seven of the Arctic Council´s eight members — all except Russia, which currently holds the council´s rotating chairmanship — have indefinitelysuspended their participation in all future meetings. In the immediate aftermath of the invasion of Ukraine, the European Union has halted all funding with Russian scientific entities, and countries like Norway have encouraged their universities to freeze ties to Russian institutions, suspending ongoing research projects.

But can we afford to leave Russia out of the global climate conversation?

The stark reality is this: a little over half of the Arctic lies within Russian borders. Researchers rely on the Arctic to understand phenomena like polar amplification, the accelerated warming experienced at the poles compared to the global average. As the permafrost — the frozen ground beneath a quarter of the Northern Hemisphere and almost 20% of Earth’s landmass — thaws, it releases vast quantities of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. This accelerates global warming, creating a dangerous feedback loop. Without access to Russian Arctic data, policymakers lack a comprehensive picture of how rapidly our planet is heating up.

I grapple with this dilemma personally. I was in Norway when Russia invaded Ukraine, joining mass demonstrations against the war. I stood in solidarity with Ukrainian classmates whose lives were plunged into uncertainty. Boycotting Russian products, like my favorite chocolate brand Freia — whose parent company, Mondelēz International, continues operations in Russia — felt like a tangible way to protest. Yet, abstaining from a chocolate bar is a far cry from sacrificing critical Arctic research that could determine the future of humanity.

The Arctic’s precarious state demands that we set geopolitical tensions aside for the greater good. Excluding Russia from climate research not only hinders our understanding but also risks leaving the Arctic vulnerable to unmonitored resource exploitation and military expansion. Even before the Ukraine conflict, Russia was expanding its military operation in the Arctic, eager to stake its claim on the region's abundant resources — estimated to include 16% of the world´s untapped oil and 30% of the world's undiscovered gas.

The war shows no sign of abating, but the climate clock is relentlessly ticking. Last year, China and the U.S. sat down at the same negotiation table and struck a climate deal while growing geopolitical and economic tensions. This has led me to believe that collaboration is possible amidst geopolitical and economic tensions, giving me hope that a pragmatic climate solution can be achieved and that scientists can collaborate on Arctic research without having to compromise their beliefs in peace.

With COP29 around the corner, we must reconsider our stance. Sanctions serve as a peaceful protest against violations of international norms, but they should not become a weapon that backfires on humanity. The Arctic is too critical to our planet's future to be sidelined. Let us strive for a solution that upholds our values while ensuring the survival of our shared world.