RAND Corporation’s Analysis on New ICE Pact Icebreakers
Naval News contacted the RAND Corporation for their analysis on the U.S. Coast Guard’s (USCG) agreement to work with Finland and Canada on advising and potentially building new USCG icebreakers.
The Icebreaker Collaboration Effort, commonly referred to as the ICE Pact, is a trilateral partnership between the United States, Canada and Finland. The ICE Pact was formed on 11 July 2024 in Washington, D.C. The ICE Pact is a partnership in efforts to bolster shipbuilding capacities and industries, especially the enhancing of icebreaker ship production capacity in Canada and Finland, and to counter the influence of the Russian Federation and China in the Arctic region.
U.S. Coast Guard Comments
Naval News contacted the U.S. Coast Guard on April 20, 2025 for comment on the ICE Pact and on April 30, 2025, the U.S Coast Guard’s Chief of Media Relations Department spokesperson replied,
“The Coast Guard is conducting market research to determine the availability of icebreaker designs and capabilities of shipyards in the U.S. and abroad to produce a complex ship on an accelerated timeline. Pending requisite legislative authority and appropriations to acquire additional icebreakers, the Coast Guard is conducting the widest survey of the market to inform future acquisition activities. At this time, the Coast Guard is not involved in any negotiations with a foreign shipyard. The Coast Guard is committed to delivering critical assets to meet the needs in the U.S. Arctic as expeditiously as possible in compliance with federal law.
“The Coast Guard is the sole federal agency responsible for icebreaking to assure U.S. access and sovereignty in the polar regions and enable the flow of maritime commerce in the Great Lakes and America’s inland waterways. Accordingly, the Service must replace, modernize, and grow our fleet of icebreakers to safeguard our national security and economic prosperity that flows through America’s $5.4 Trillion marine transportation system. We are committed to working with the Administration and Congress to fulfill the President’s direction on icebreaker acquisition.”
U.S. Coast Guard Media Relations Headquarters
Naval News then asked the U.S. Coast Guard for the status of the Polar Security Cutters (PSC) and the U.S. Coast Guard’s Media Relations Headquarters replied on May 1, 2025 with,
On December 19th, 2024, the U.S. Coast Guard and U.S. Navy Integrated Program Office received approval to begin building the first PSC. In this decision sixteen modules out of 85 total, were authorized by the Department. Currently, ten of those modules are in various stages of completion. On April 30, 2025, the Coast Guard received approval from the Department of Homeland Security for full production of the first Polar Security Cutter (PSC).
RAND Corporation’s Analysis on Icebreakers
Naval News reached out to the RAND Corporation for their analysis and RAND’s Michelle Ziegler and Jeffrey Drezner, both Senior Technical Analysts and Professors of Policy Analysis at the RAND School of Public Policy replied.
Naval News: Please provide analysis and comment on the following: “On December 19th, 2024, the U.S. Coast Guard and U.S. Navy Integrated Program Office received approval to begin building the first PSC. In this decision sixteen modules out of 85 total, were authorized by the Department. Currently, ten of those modules are in various stages of completion. On April 30, 2025, the Coast Guard received approval from the Department of Homeland Security for full production of the first Polar Security Cutter (PSC). —USCG 5/1/2025”
RAND: We are not familiar with the specifics, but the statement indicates construction of the lead ship was approved before the initial modules were completed. GAO has identified that a best practice in the commercial shipbuilding industry is to ensure design maturity before entering the construction phase. Entering full production—in this case, maybe construction of the lead ship—too early can lead to cost, schedule and technical issues later. Government shipbuilding history holds many examples where the complexity of the process, or external influences like supply chains, hurricanes, or budget timing changes have led to not being able to follow best practices and seen resulting delays and cost overruns.
Naval News: Please provide commentary to: “The Coast Guard is conducting market research to determine the availability of icebreaker designs and capabilities of shipyards in the US and abroad to produce a complex ship on an accelerated timeline. Pending requisite legislative authority and appropriations to acquire additional icebreakers, the Coast Guard is conducting the widest survey of the market to inform future acquisition activities. At this time, the Coast Guard is not involved in any negotiations with a foreign shipyard. The Coast Guard is committed to delivering critical assets to meet the needs in the U.S. Arctic as expeditiously as possible in compliance with federal law.
The Coast Guard is the sole federal agency responsible for icebreaking to assure U.S. access and sovereignty in the polar regions and enable the flow of maritime commerce in the Great Lakes and America’s inland waterways. Accordingly, the Service must replace, modernize, and grow our fleet of icebreakers to safeguard our national security and economic prosperity that flows through America’s $5.4 Trillion marine transportation system. We are committed to working with the Administration and Congress to fulfill the President’s direction on icebreaker acquisition.” —USCG
Question: Do you believe that the U.S. Coast Guard needs help from foreign nations with building the new icebreakers, and if so, how would RAND approach this with guidance and advice?
RAND: Foreign shipyards and ship design firms do have more recent icebreaker design and construction experience than U.S. shipyards, which could be beneficial. Several foreign-based firms have facilities in the U.S. and a contracting history with the USCG and the US Navy. Doing good market research to understand your options is a best practice, so the USCG should be commended for that. Reaching out to foreign firms can and should be part of market research. There are also acquisition and contracting strategies that enable the USCG to leverage the experience of foreign firms such as partnering between US and foreign shipyards, hiring a foreign firm with requisite experience for design and engineering consulting or use of parent designs. These are all approaches the USCG can and should consider for both polar and domestic icebreaking fleets. The ICE Pact encourages these kinds of strategies. In March, MARAD [Maritime Administration] put out an RFI [Request for Information] to gather information on the US shipbuilding industry, with specific focus on the tenants of the ICE Pact. Having detailed insights into the current capability and capacity of the US shipbuilding industry can support more informed decision making and understanding where collaborations with other countries can be best leveraged for designing and building icebreakers of all types.
Naval News: What are some of the pitfalls and disadvantages of working with foreign nations and building the new USCG icebreaker overseas?
RAND: There are potential political sensitivities here, especially building a vessel overseas. A foreign firm without past US government contracting experience might not be familiar with the process, which could lead to programmatic issues. But there should not be any pitfalls that can’t be anticipated and mitigated any more than using a US-based shipyard.
Naval News: Would U.S. Union Labor and U.S. steel be an issue if the new icebreakers are built overseas?
RAND: Possibly. These are some of those political sensitivities. There is precedent with foreign steel being allowed in certain situations. It’s a somewhat complicated and nuanced area to navigate. Part of ICE Pact is to bolster workforce development as well. This could indicate that union labor details are concerns to be thoughtfully included and navigated, rather than a solid barrier.
Naval News: What are some issues and advice for the heavy and medium Polar Security Cutters to be built in the US and/or overseas?
RAND: We haven’t done the analysis to have any insight or provide advice on where to build these icebreakers. Some form of partnering with more experienced foreign firms should be considered in the decision process. The PSC is already being constructed in the US.
Naval News: What is wrong with the current process of building the Polar Security Cutters and what can be done to fix these issues?
RAND: We haven’t done the analysis to answer this question. But the issue is most likely related to how existing policies and processes are applied, as well as being affected by external factors. In government contracting, it’s not uncommon for a proposal that underestimated technical risk, cost, and schedule. Fixes can include following best practice: mature the design, understand risks, maintain stable requirements, and hold contractor accountable for performance.
Naval News: What nations would RAND pick to build the new icebreakers and why? What teams should be formed?
RAND: RAND would not pick any nations, and it’s the qualities of the shipyard not the nation that are of primary importance. However, the ICE Pact enables relationships with shipyards in Canada and Finland, and the icebreaking ship design and construction industries in those countries have the requisite experience. Denmark also has experienced firms. For commercial shipbuilding expertise generally, yards in South Korea and Japan have capabilities worth considering and learning from.
President Trump Wants to Buy Icebreakers from Finland
On June 25, 2025, President Trump at the NATO Summit in The Hague, Netherlands, said that he wanted to buy 15 icebreakers from Finland.
“I want to buy icebreakers; you are very good at icebreakers. There is a fairly new, but it’s [a] used icebreaker, and I offered him [Finland’s President Alexander Stub] about one-third of what he asked for, but we’re negotiating. We need icebreakers in the U.S., and if we can get some inexpensively, I’d like to do that. Also, we may buy some icebreakers. You’re the `King of icebreakers;’ they [Finland] make them really good and they know what they’re doing, and so we’re negotiating with them for about 15 different icebreakers, and one of them is available now. It’s 5-6 years old, and we’re trying to buy it; we’re trying to make a good deal.”
President Donald Trump, June 25, 2025 at The Hague, Netherlands,
responding to a reporter’s question
Naval News has reached out to the U.S. Coast Guard’s Public Affairs Office for comment and clarification on President Trump’s June 25, 2025 statement.
