Det hvite hus deler bilde av Trump som «ser på» Grønland
– Dette grenser til psykologisk krigføring, sier representant for grønlendere i Danmark, Julie Rademacher.
– USA kan ta kontroll på en halvtime
Sjekk https://tinyurl.com/3kv7b63w
----oooo00O00oooo----
Wait a minute, is America invading Greenland?
US President Donald J Trump is no stranger to using military threats as a political play, with much of his second term, thus far, being defined by his foreign policy moves, namely in the Middle East and South America.
Though President Trump is known to make a lot of empty threats and false promises, his recent military action in Venezuela and arrest of the country’s president, Nicolás Maduro, point to his expansionist rhetoric having legitimate, tangible geopolitical implications.
Just one day after Operation Absolute Resolve in Venezuela, President Trump was back at it telling reporters that he “very badly” wanted to acquire Greenland and have it under US control, with the White House doubling down on Trump’s comments, saying that military action in the Danish Territory is “always an option”.
Though autonomous and self-governing, Greenland is a territory/district of Denmark and has been since 1953. The island nation has two representatives in the Danish Parliament, as well as its own political system.
Geographically, Greenland sits in very close proximity to not only the US – about 3,200 kilometres away – but also Canada, Norway, and Russia. It’s positioned right between the US and Europe, and also the GIUK gap, a maritime passage linking the Arctic and Atlantic Ocean.
Why Greenland?
Trump has continually expressed a keen interest in Greenland as a part of his clearly domineering, almost imperialistic political agenda.
He has been talking about the potential US occupation of Greenland since his first term in office, saying in 2019 that “essentially it’s a large real estate deal”, and even made a public pitch to Greenlanders, all 58,000 of them, saying last year, “We are ready to invest billions of dollars to create new jobs and make you rich.”
In March 2025, he said America is willing to “go as far as we have to go” to gain control of the territory.
He mainly justifies this from a national security standpoint, telling reporters earlier this week that the territory is “covered with Russian and Chinese ships”.
Additionally, there is a strategic benefit for the US to have a closer connection to the Arctic circle, with melting polar ice caps expected to become critical trade routes over the next few decades (a scary thought), as well the territory being rich in many rare earth minerals that are used in everyday global items such as electric vehicles and phones.
America and Greenland’s long-term, long-distance relationship
The United States and Greenland have been lasting allies, with their history going back to World War II, where the US explicitly extended its Monroe Doctrine to prevent Nazi occupation of Greenland, following the capture of Denmark in Operation Weserübung.
The foreign policy document essentially opposes European colonisation and says if a European nation attempts interference with any nation in the Americas, the US will see that as an attack on themselves. Expanding this in 1940 to defend Greenland was an act of allyship and granted America temporary control of the Danish territory.
In 1951 the nations signed the “Defense of Greenland Agreement” that granted the US the ability to build and operate a military base as a NATO member, the Pituffik Space Base that is still operational today.
So, is America going to do something?
“The President and his team are discussing a range of options to pursue this important foreign policy goal, and of course, utilising the US military is always an option at the Commander in Chief’s disposal,” a statement from the White House said.
Greenland’s prime minister, Jens-Frederik Nielsen, said that President Trump’s dream of controlling Greenland represents “fantasies of annexation”.
“We are open to dialogue. We are open to discussions. But this must happen through the proper channels and with respect for international law.”
“You cannot compare Greenland to Venezuela. We are a democratic country.
President Trump’s support base back in the States is weary also, with only 8 per cent of Republicans “strongly” favouring US pressure on Denmark to “hand over” Greenland, according to a 2025 Reuters poll.
With President Trump’s “alcoholic personality” as his Chief of Staff Susie Wiles said, his addiction to power makes it unclear to people on the outside exactly what his next moves will be.
White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller did not shy away from a threatening and combative message to the world though, saying that “nobody’s going to fight the United States military over the future of Greenland”.
Global response and NATO implications
Earlier this week, leaders from seven European countries – France, Germany, Italy, Poland, Spain, the United Kingdom and Denmark – released a joint statement against President Trump’s continued pressure and perseverance, a statement that was shortly after backed by Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney.
“Greenland belongs to its people. It is for Denmark and Greenland, and them only, to decide on matters concerning Denmark and Greenland,” the statement read.
“We and many other allies have increased our presence, activities and investments, to keep the Arctic safe and to deter adversaries. The Kingdom of Denmark – including Greenland – is part of NATO.
“Security in the Arctic must therefore be achieved collectively, in conjunction with NATO allies including the United States, by upholding the principles of the UN Charter, including sovereignty, territorial integrity and the inviolability of borders.”
Denmark’s prime minister, Mette Frederiksen, has warned that if President Trump’s ambitions for Greenland became a reality, it would mean NATO is virtually over.
“If the US chooses to attack another NATO country militarily, then everything stops, including NATO and thus the security that has been established since the end of the Second World War,” she said on Danish television.
Final thoughts
President Trump has had longstanding issues, critiques and qualms with NATO, as he believes their spending on defence is inadequate. Although he is not the first US president to critique this aspect of the alliance, with Barack Obama and George W Bush then advocating for greater defence budgets by NATO allies.
Currently, NATO members invest 5 per cent of their gross domestic product to defence requirements, split 3.5 per cent into core assets and 1.5 per cent into industry and civil preparedness.
What’s different with President Trump’s critiques though is that he sees NATO as a hindrance to his “America First” agenda and has actively disavowed its ethos.
In a 2024 campaign rally, he actively “encourage[d]” Russia to act in hostility and have free reign over their action against NATO allies that don’t spend enough on defence.
“One of the presidents of a big country stood up, he said, ‘Well sir, if we don’t pay and we’re attacked by Russia. Will you protect us?’
“I said, you didn’t pay; you’re delinquent. No, I would not protect you, and in fact, I would encourage them (Russia) to do whatever the hell they want.”
Trump’s America is increasingly reactive and unpredictable, so knowing his next steps is hard to predict.
What is clear though is that he wants Greenland but Greenland doesn’t want him.
Ingen kommentarer:
Legg inn en kommentar
Merk: Bare medlemmer av denne bloggen kan legge inn en kommentar.