Early last week, President Donald Trump stated his intentions to buy Greenland, a territory currently controlled by Denmark. Despite pushback from Denmark and the European Union, Trump has stated that he plans to forcibly annex Greenland whether they like it or not.
On Wednesday, Trump met with the government of Denmark over Greenland, which resulted in a fundamental disagreement, as stated by Denmark’s foreign minister, Lars Lokke Rasmussen. Trump has emphasized that anything less than full United States control over Greenland is unacceptable.
“It is hard to see how this is necessary, especially since the US has acknowledged Denmark’s right to Greenland since 1916,” Global Politics teacher Martin Jorgensen said. “The US has had free access to station troops as they see fit on Greenland, so if the US wants to place more troops, they could do so within the existing framework and without full control over the territory,”
Trump defends his plan to take over Greenland as a national security priority to deter Russian and Chinese military activity. He claims that there are several Russian and Chinese warships surrounding Greenland, though this has been proven false. Trump states that if the US does not take over, then Russia or China will.
Denmark has declared that Greenland is not for sale, and they will protect the sovereignty of the Kingdom of Denmark. Trump has stated that he hopes to make a deal “the easy way”, but will obtain Greenland “the hard way” if necessary.
“I don’t think that Trump has a valid reason to take over Greenland,” senior Ella Patzer said. “I think that Greenland is its own sovereign territory and can decide how to handle perceived threats itself.”
There are several global political implications at hand if the US decides to obtain Greenland using military force. Both the US and Greenland are members of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), a military alliance that states that an attack on one is an attack on all. Military intervention would break this treaty, which has not had a conflict between two members since its creation.
“In all of NATO’s 75 years of existence, there has never been a direct or violent conflict between member states,” senior Lila Pollak said. “It is shocking to think that this event could destroy the entire treaty.”
Another reason for US acquisition, besides national security, is Greenland’s abundance of rare earth elements. Greenland contains many untapped minerals that have sparked interest amongst many international investors. There is a lot of economic opportunity in Greenland due to the possibility of wealth from key minerals and materials.
Trump has just recently seized the government of Venezuela, taking Venezuela president Nicolus Maduro hostage. As Trump shared plans to maintain US control over Venezuela, the two events can be compared in two key ways according to Jorgensen.
“These events both seem to emphasize the US’ strategic plan for dominance in the western hemisphere,” Jorgensen said. “They also both present a more tactical desire to rebrand American foreign policy.”
