What’s with Greenland?

As I noted here in an article last spring entitled “Hands off Greenland”, the world’s largest island was at the center of a developing controversy. President Trump was telling all who would listen that, for national security reasons, the United States needed to take over Greenland, amicably if possible or by force if necessary. While many were shocked by Trump’s imperialistic statements, most people, at least in this country, took his words as ill-considered bluster. But he kept telling questioners that he had to have Greenland (oftenechoing the former King of France, Louis XIV who famously said, “L’État c’est moi!”.

Since 1951, the U.S. has had a security agreement with Denmark giving it near total freedom to install and operate whatever military facilities it wanted on Greenland. At one point there were sixteen small bases across the island, now there’s only one. Denmark’s Prime Minister has told President Trump that the U.S. should feel free to expand its installations if needed. As climate change is starting to allow a future passage from thePacific Ocean to the Arctic, many countries are showing interest in Greenland including Russia and China but this hardly indicates an international crisis as Trump and his subordinates insist.

Researchers believe that, buried beneath the mammoth glaciers covering most of the land are rich deposits of various rare earth minerals including those needed for modern batteries and other hi-tech devices. Trump has already made a deal with Ukraine to supply them more arms in return for rights to its underground “rare earth” deposits. Some have called this extortion but to Trump it was business as usual. Greenland’s buried treasures could be a much bigger deal.

But perhaps Trump’s lifelong obsession with size is the dominant reason he feels he must have the world’s largest island; like his planned White House ballroom, for him this is essentially an ego trip.

The U.S. has lately lost moral authority in foreign affairs by its illegal invasion of Venezuela and the kidnapping of its President; a military invasion and takeover of Greenland, a territory of Denmark, one of its staunchest allies, would place us in a category with Putin’s Russia, an enemy of the Free World. And moreover it would encourage Russia, China or other authoritarian states to move against their neighbors in endless power grabs.

Greenlanders and Danes have made it clear from the beginning that they do not wish to become American and are not for sale, Trump’s subordinates have tried to advance a scheme whereby Elon Musk might buy a majority of the individual Greenlanders’ votes to sell their country to the U.S.; however Denmark has the last word and is not about to agree to selling Greenland to anyone.

Although Greenlanders have largely been in favorof eventual independence, since Trump’s intemperate demands they have locked arms with Denmark. Recently, large demonstrations in both places have expressed anger, but even more, sadness that their staunch ally would turn against them.

The reaction of Denmark’s NATO allies has been clear; at least eight, with likely others to follow, have denounced the U.S. stance and several have sent token national military forces to Greenland. This was immediately followed by Trump issuing severe specific tariff threats (even though the legality of even his existing tariffs is currently being adjudicated in the Supreme Court). All these actions could be a death blow to most current American alliances with Europe.

Other than Trump’s appointees those who support the President’s claim to Greenland are hard to find in the U.S. or elsewhere. While most Republican political leaders have avoided speaking out on the matter, a few have including Senators Thom Tillis of North Carolina and former Majority leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, both condemning the possible “taking” in no uncertain terms . Seasoned diplomat, Michael McFaul has called Trump’s insistence on “owning” Greenland as “the worst idea in American history.”

After speaking to the assembled crowd of political leaders and industrialists at Davos, Trump began discussions with Mark Rutte, secretary General of NATO and others after which, in a striking turnaround,he announced that they had put together the basis of a “deal” regarding Greenland.

But neither Greenland nor Denmark had been involved in those discussions; both rejected the agreement’s proposal that the United States would have sovereignty over the military bases both new and existing. Another facet of the proposal giving the U.S. control of underground mineral rights may proveexcessive to both Greenland and Denmark.

Although everyone seems relieved that the crisis appears to be largely over, the rupture between Europe and the U.S. remains. Considering President Trump’s erratic state of mind (in his speech at Davos he referred to Greenland as Iceland at least 3 times), who knows what he may demand tomorrow?

Architect and landscape designer Mac Gordon lives in Lakeville.