New in PJ Media:
In Greenland on Friday, Vice President JD Vance appealed directly to Greenlanders to choose to join the United States rather than remain a possession of Denmark. In doing so, he demonstrated once again that the idea of the U.S. acquiring Greenland is not some crazy notion that somehow got into the head of Orange Man Bad, but a serious matter that is based on the interests of both Greenlanders and Americans.
Vance had harsh words for the Danes who currently retain sovereignty over Greenland: “Our message to Denmark is very simple: You have not done a good job by the people of Greenland. You have underinvested in the people of Greenland and you have underinvested in the security architecture of this incredible, beautiful land mass filled with incredible people.”
That but about “security architecture” is the key to this entire affair. Vance was criticizing Denmark because it has allowed China, in particular, to establish a significant presence there, a presence that could end up being a significant threat not only to the U.S., but to Canada and Europe. Accordingly, Just the News reported, Vance “told Greenlanders that Russia and China, two of the world’s biggest powers, also have eyes on the Arctic island as a strategic bulwark, so that should also be of concern to them.”
Indeed. Clingendael Research, a Dutch think tank that produces “state-of-the-art analyses and policy research in international affairs for governments, businesses and NGO’s,” reported that “in 2018, the People’s Republic of China published its first Arctic strategy, claiming that the Middle Kingdom is a ‘near-Arctic state.’” It added that “it is quickly becoming clear that China has built a geostrategic presence in the Arctic that is not to be sniggered at. It is already reshaping circumpolar politics in fundamental ways.”
The report detailed intense Chinese activity in Greenland beginning in 2005 and noted that “the void created when Greenland was given greater autonomy [in 2009] from central authorities in the Kingdom of Denmark and subsequently left the EEC was happily filled by China. Even though the Kingdom of Denmark remains responsible for foreign policy and defence, Greenland can now conclude international agreements with foreign states on its own. This raises issues for both the Kingdom of Denmark and the EU.” Yet “While the Arctic rises in geopolitical and geo-economic significance, the EU has been slow to reconsider its strategic interests.”
Trump wants to counter this, and so Vance explained: “This is why President Trump’s policy in Greenland is what it is. It’s consistent with the first Trump administration where you saw significant investments in Arctic security and it will continue over the next four years under President Trump’s leadership.”
There is more. Read the rest here.
Huey says
Surely Trump has a point, but: ‘non tali ‘auxilio”. The Danes have already indicated that they are willing to discuss the mining of the mineral deposits and the increase of US military presence in Greenland, so what’s this buffoon bleating about? He’s playing a game that may well blow up in his face, to wit when the EU has been completely estranged from the US, has built up enough military force to withstand Trump and finally gets bored with his uncivilised b.s..
Rarely says
Denmark might get a better price for Greenland from Russia, China or (gasp!) Saudi Arabia. So why “gift” it to the IS? Highest bidder time coming soon.
Tony Rice says
Denmark may GOVERN Greenland but I doubt they OWN it and able legally to sell it.
WPM says
That should be good for Canada having those countries controlling Greenland China or Russia ,but China might just buy Canada ,they seem to own the people running Canada now anyway.
WPM says
Built up miltary with what? Without America NATO is nothing ,Without our bases, equipment ,and arm forces in Greenland and Europe are both total undefended .European leaders built up what armies with what the refugees are the majority of miltary age men living in their countries .They European countries became depended like German on cheap Russia nation gas, oil and are de-industrializing themselves with green unreliable energy that is too expense for industrial use. Europe a collection of countries under the EU are going to war with America over our policy with Greenland ?The EU could give a rat ass what is good for the people in Greenland or Denmark ,or even in any of the European countries they are trying to control threw mass immigration ,and the chaos they cause the native population in Europe they they hold in contempt. The EU leaders are unelected one wordlist ,I think more and more people are seeing what they are about .J.D. Vance’s speech in Munich about a month ago left them speechless when he ask them why did they expect America to defend them when they can not define what is worth defending?
James Lincoln says
WPM,
The United States, over the years since NATO was first started, should have never allowed members to pay much much less than their fair share.
And part of the NATO deal should have been for the individual countries to have significant defense assets – including military hardware and adequate numbers of service members for their own protection.
If this had happened, NATO countries would not have been able to afford cradle-to-grave social programs for not only their citizens but also for illegal migrants.
࿗Infidel࿘ says
If we took at face value the rationalization of NATO that Russia is still our #1 enemy (not China, not Turkey, not islam), then procuring Greenland – whether by buying it from Denmark or militarily seizing it in the same way that Russia seized Ukraine – would be the #1 thing we should do for our security
Take a globe (not a map)! Russian threats to the US are not gonna be trans-Atlantic. They’d either have missiles in their Far Eastern provinces like Kamchatka and Chukotka or submarines w/ nukes in the Bering Sea to target the West Coast – from Seattle to San Diego, and some states deep. Or, if they were targeting NYC or DC, they’d pack their ICBMs or hypersonic missiles in their Tundra regions in a great circular path via the North Pole, and aim it that way. In neither scenario is Europe involved
Initially, 6 years ago, I was mildly bemused by the idea of obtaining Greenland. However, the more I think about it, the more strongly am I of the opinion that we should get it. Whether it is by trading it for Puerto Rico or anything else (maybe offer the Danes California 😈), At least, it should shut up those who claim that by letting NATO down, we are diluting our own security
࿗Infidel࿘ says
Typo….
Russia seized
UkraineCrimea, not UkraineDaniel Triplett says
That’s right. Greenland has enormous strategic military value. Whoever controls Greenland controls the North Atlantic and North Pole. All the most important great circle routes for our national security cross the Arctic.
The Danes would be speaking German and saluting the swastika were out not for our sacrifice of blood and treasure, and benevolently liberating their people and returning their sovereignty to them free of charge. Did they even say “thank you”? They should cede their claim of sovereignty over Greenland to us, either free or charge for what we did for them, or at a reasonable price, so that they may continue enjoying the safety and security that we’ve been providing them for the last 80 years.
No people has a birthright to Earth’s territory. No one gets to call dibs on chunks of our planet. Any territory claimed as sovereign must be defended. If a people can’t defend it, then a people who can defend the territory will take it. That’s the way the world has always worked since the dawn of man.
Denmark can’t defend Greenland. Denmark can’t even defend Denmark.
࿗Infidel࿘ says
A very different Denmark from the one that once conquered England
Ralph says
Infidel: You’re onto something. “Maybe offer the Danes California”. Splendid! Throw in Puerto Rico as a chaser. Gets my vote.
Alkflaeda says
Interestingly, there’s a petition on the UK Parliamentary petitions website asking that the Chagos Islands be ceded to the US, rather than Mauritius. The Chagossians say they want to stay British; the ICJ says no. Coming under US rule would mean that their governance was still informed by Western values.
Daniel Triplett says
So disappointing for the UK to let Mauritius or the ICJ tell it what to do. Diego Garcia is part of that island chain. Another major strategic location island on the globe. We launched B-1/B-2/B-52 airstrikes into Afghanistan from there. We have B-2 deployed there right now in preparation for the Iran strikes. Especially since the genius military strategist Joe Biden surrendered Bagram Airbase, the Diego Garcia airstrip is now indispensable.