Recent polls suggest large majorities of Americans do not approve of seizing Greenland by force, or even “buying” it. A poll last year in Greenland found 85% of Greenland’s people do not favor becoming part of the U.S. The foreign ministers of both Greenland and Denmark, have stated that Greenland is not for sale and violation of the territorial integrity of Denmark, or the right of self-determination of the Greenlandic people, is “totally unacceptable.”
Yet after Trump’s Venezuela assault, Trump stated: “We are going to do something on Greenland, whether they like it or not,” and that the U.S. will get Greenland the “hard way” it if can’t be obtained the “easy way.” White House press secretary Leavitt stated “using the military is always an option.” Trump is considering doing what the world has castigated Russia’s Putin for doing: taking territory from another nation against its will, and by force.
Many of our NATO partners disagree with Trump’s proposed takeover, and Denmark, France, Germany, Finland, Norway and Sweden have started moving troops into Greenland, implicitly to help deter, or defend against, any U.S. assault.
Trump’s insistence that the U.S. has to “own” Greenland, a part of Denmark, could fracture NATO, weakening U.S. national security, not strengthening it. Such a fracture would benefit both Russia and China, with, for example, Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney explaining Canada’s relationship with China is now “more predictable” than its relationship with the U.S. under Trump.
The national security rationale Trump has offered for seizing Greenland is flimsy. We already have a large military base in Greenland, the Pituffik Space Base. According to the U.S. Space Force, “Pituffik … exists today due to agreements between the United States and the Kingdom of Denmark … Strategically, [Pituffik’s] … ‘Top of the World’ vantage point enables Space Superiority. Pituffik … supports Missile Warning, Missile Defense and Space Surveillance missions …”
In 2004 Greenland, Denmark and the U.S. renegotiated their 1951 defense agreement for Greenland, one that gave the U.S. wide latitude to increase or otherwise change its defense installations there, upon consultation with Denmark, specifically including permitting an upgrade of the U.S.’s Thule radar base to function as part of an anti-missile defense system.
The U.S. itself reduced its number of troops and bases in Greenland from 18,000 – 20,000 troops at a peak to only 150 or 200 today, and itself dropped the number of U.S. bases there from 18 bases down to just one, according to former Danish Minister of Foreign Affairs Per Stig Moller, who negotiated the 2004 revision.
Article II(3)(b) of the amended Greenland Defense Agreement already permits the U.S. to “improve and generally … fit the area for military use” and to “construct, install, maintain, and operate facilities and equipment” there. With an existing joint defense treaty already in place giving such sweeping latitude to the U.S., there’s no proven need to insist on U.S. sovereignty over Greenland to achieve our national security aims.
So why is Trump pushing to get ownership of Greenland, given the downsides, at no real gain in defense position?
One reason may be the minerals and oil wealth in Greenland, which Trump may want to extract for “free” if the U.S. took over Greenland. Trump also seems to be looking for a legacy of territorial additions to the U.S. He’s a fan of President McKinley, who presided over U.S. annexation of Hawaii, Guam, Puerto Rico, and (for a time) the Philippines.
Constantly ginning up new war(s) has another advantage. It can serve as a politically useful distraction from, say, sagging approval ratings or sexual scandals. (Heard much about the Epstein files lately?)
But unilaterally annexing other nations’ territory, especially by force violates UN Charter Articles 2(3) (settle disputes by peaceful means) and 2(4) (refrain from threat or use of force). That Charter was partly meant to avoid repeats of Germany’s 1939 invasions for territorial annexation, the opening crimes that sparked years of catastrophic carnage in World War II.
After Venezuela and Greenland, Trump or his minions have already implied Colombia, Cuba, Nicaragua or Mexico could be next. Ultimately, the forever wars Trump is preparing will be an attack on the American people, undermining our constitutional democracy and costing billions of taxpayer dollars. Sooner or later, Trump’s forever wars are going to cost American lives. Even MAGA stalwarts did not vote for this.
Rudy Perkins lives in Amherst.