What does Trump want with Greenland?
US President-elect Donald Trump has again laid claim to Greenland and has not ruled out military action to take control of the country. Furthermore, his oldest son is currently paying a 'private visit' to the Arctic island. Denmark's Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen has rejected the idea of a takeover, affirming that Greenland belongs to the Greenlanders. Commentators discuss the ramifications of Trump's initiative.
Don't let him exploit this dispute
Trump must not emerge as the winner in the conflict over Greenland's autonomy, warns Politiken:
“If the Greenlanders want to secede, it must happen after they have made an informed choice about the pros and cons of belonging to the Danish Realm and according to the rules that Greenland and Denmark have mutually committed to. Trump is trying to destroy the Greenland-Danish relationship with his 'Greenland delegation'. So instead of getting angry with each other, Denmark and Greenland should take a clear and united stand against Trump's inappropriate intervention. If Donald Trump succeeds in driving a wedge between Denmark and Greenland, there will be two losers and one winner.”
Failure to assume full responsibility
Berlingske notes that it is not only Trump's fault that it has come to this:
“Denmark has failed as a major Arctic power. Because that's what you are when you have foreign and defence policy control and responsibility for Greenland's strategically crucial 2.1 million square kilometres. For too long, Denmark has failed to grasp what this responsibility entails. We have underestimated the importance of Greenland's security needs - and this is exactly what Trump is now using as an argument for the US to take control. Denmark has so far failed to invest in adequate security. We were a major power, but we acted like a minor state.”
Not even Nato membership will deter him
Trump's words should not be dismissed as exaggerations, warns La Stampa:
“Exuding supreme confidence, speaking off the cuff, he said many things that must be taken seriously even though they go against common sense and the international normality. They must be taken seriously because Trump has the conviction, the will and the means to implement them. There are few domestic institutional constraints, he has no personal inhibitions and needs to act fast. ... Trump has explicitly not ruled out either economic coercion or military intervention. ... Greenland belongs to Denmark. So not ruling out military intervention means that for the new US president it would not be inconceivable to invade the territory of a Nato ally.”
Possibility of negotiations in the near future
Tvnet also fears a major conflict:
“Given that Denmark has shown no willingness to grant Greenland independence, and is instead investing more in ensuring its military presence and giving more prominence to the Greenlandic polar bear in the royal coat of arms, we may see an interesting interaction between the interests of the two Nato members the US and Denmark in the years to come. While a military occupation by the US is an unlikely scenario, Trump is already exerting pressure with his rhetoric, according to which the use of force is not out of the question, which points to the possibility of negotiations in the near future.”
Focus on frozen island to distract from hot war
In a Facebook post, Abbas Galliamov says that this could be an attempt by Trump to divert attention to foreign policy:
“Either he's really losing his mind or he's cynically trying to change the agenda. This could be linked to certain problems – including those related to Russia and Ukraine. Having realised that he won't be able to fulfil his promise to end the war in 24 hours, Trump may now be trying to ensure that no one even remembers it. The new-old US president is a leader who focuses on appearances rather than substance, so he has no qualms about simply replacing failed projects with something else.”