07/01/2026
Opinion: Any future Bering Strait railway must start with Anchorage.
By Fyodor Soloview. Published: June 5, 2026
For more than 35 years — from the era of Soviet perestroika to today’s geopolitical headlines — proposals to connect Asia and North America by rail through a Bering Strait tunnel have captured the imagination of engineers and policymakers. Russian, American, Korean and Chinese researchers regularly publish maps showing a bold line stretching across Alaska toward Canada.
Yet one crucial question is usually left unanswered: How would the railroad actually cross Alaska?
Too often, Alaska appears on global maps as empty white space — a place where a straight line can be drawn without regard for mountains, permafrost, wildlife refuges or communities. But Alaska is not the moon. Any serious discussion must begin with the geography, economy and people of this state.
A high-capacity corridor, not a symbolic line
A future rail link between Asia and North America would need to be high-speed or heavy-capacity to justify its cost. Over distances of 4,000 to 6,000 miles between Asia and major U.S. markets, conventional slow rail would struggle to compete with ocean shipping. Modern high-speed systems operate above 200 mph, reducing inland transit times and easing congestion at coastal gateways such as Los Angeles and Seattle.
High-speed construction is expensive — often relying on elevated viaducts and tunneling to maintain straight, level alignments. Yet these structures also reduce surface disruption. Wildlife such as moose and bears are separated from the tracks, eliminating collision risks. Roads and trails remain open without grade crossings, and surrounding land remains accessible.
Mountain tunnels can also moderate Alaska’s harsh winter conditions. Subsurface alignments are less exposed to extreme cold, drifting snow and ice accumulation, potentially reducing long-term maintenance demands compared with fully exposed track.
Once a corridor commits to high-speed standards, tunneling through mountain ranges or elevating track across difficult terrain becomes part of the core engineering model rather than an extraordinary add-on. Shorter, more direct alignments improve long-term efficiency and reduce operating costs.
Why Anchorage deserves serious consideration
Many speculative maps route the line through Fairbanks simply because existing Alaska Railroad track already reaches there. But geography and economics suggest Anchorage may be the more logical hub.
Anchorage and the Mat-Su region together approach half a million residents. The area includes a major international cargo airport and deep-water port access. On a globe — rather than a flat projection — the great-circle alignment between Asia and North American markets bends southward. A corridor oriented toward Anchorage aligns more naturally with global traffic flows than one that detours far north before turning south again.
A realistic Alaska alignment
A potential route could begin near Wales on the Seward Peninsula and proceed south toward Anchorage before crossing into Canada. Rather than cutting directly through protected lands, planners could route the corridor through geographic gaps between conservation areas, including Innoko National Wildlife Refuge, Yukon Delta National Wildlife Refuge and Denali National Park and Preserve.
From Anchorage, the line could continue through Palmer and Glennallen before crossing into Yukon and connecting with Canada’s rail network, providing access south toward Seattle and east toward major hubs such as Edmonton, potentially integrating with emerging high-speed systems in the Lower 48, including the network under development in California.
Port MacKenzie, Knik Arm and governance
Port MacKenzie, across Knik Arm from Anchorage, offers broad, relatively level terrain suitable for a major customs and logistics hub. Long straight alignments and rail yards could be developed there with fewer extreme earthworks than in mountainous regions. Such a facility could operate using juxtaposed controls, meaning customs and border inspections occur before departure rather than at the tunnel itself, as implemented on Eurostar service through the Channel Tunnel. Conducting inspections in Southcentral Alaska, where winters are milder than in the Interior, would simplify year-round operations.
A long-discussed Knik Arm bridge could become a strategic link connecting Anchorage directly to the corridor.
Operation of a Bering Strait tunnel and related infrastructure would likely require a new international or federally chartered entity, similar to other major cross-border projects. Inspection teams could function under bilateral agreements combining American personnel with authorized international staff, with corresponding facilities on the Asian side near major hubs in northeastern China. These are matters of institutional design and negotiation, not insurmountable barriers.
Alaska’s economic stake
The central policy issue is not simply whether the railway could be built, but how Alaska would benefit.
The state could explore long-term leasing arrangements tied to freight and passenger volumes, potentially creating a durable revenue stream comparable in strategic importance to the Trans-Alaska Pipeline. Such income could help stabilize state finances and strengthen the Permanent Fund dividend.
A first step: Rail to Canada?
Even if a Bering Strait tunnel remains 20 to 50 years away, Alaska faces a more immediate decision: whether to extend conventional Alaska Railroad track south into Yukon and British Columbia.
A Canada link could connect Alaska to the continental rail network sooner, opening new markets, increasing freight flexibility and reducing reliance on maritime shipping. It would strengthen the state’s economy whether or not a trans-Bering tunnel is ever built, serving as both a practical standalone investment and a potential first stage of a larger corridor.
A public poll on InterBering.com invites residents to express their views on whether such a connection should be pursued, adding a civic dimension to this long-term infrastructure discussion.
Planning begins now
Planning for any transcontinental corridor requires long-term thinking. Broader public understanding of Alaska’s geography and infrastructure challenges is also important.
One constructive step could be the creation of a permanent physical relief map of Alaska at the Anchorage Museum, displaying terrain, mountain ranges and major land ownership patterns, along with a clearly marked proposed high-speed rail alignment. Seeing a potential corridor across the state’s real topography would allow visitors to better grasp distances, elevation changes and routing complexity. Such an exhibit would not promote a predetermined outcome but would ground public discussion in geography rather than abstraction.
Whether driven by public investment, private capital or technological change, global trade pressures will continue generating new transportation concepts. Alaska’s responsibility is to engage thoughtfully and ensure its long-term interests are clearly represented in any serious discussion.
Fyodor “Theo” Soloview is an Anchorage-based transportation researcher and founder of InterBering LLC, an Alaska–registered private company focused on analysis, pre–development and coalition building for a future rail and utility connection between North America and Eurasia via the Bering Strait.
https://www.adn.com/opinions/2026/06/05/opinion-any-future-bering-strait-railway-must-start-with-anchorage/
A transcontinental rail corridor could cross Alaska one day, and that’s why the state should shape the plan now.
