Trump Wants to Buy Greenland
wsj.com
wsj.com
This is where the story takes a dark turn.
Global warming and the reduction of arctic sea ice is making this marginally interesting place more interesting all the time. In 10-20 years Greenland could become the center of a power struggle among countries seeking to obtain it.
Would the US allow China or Russia, for example to buy it? No need to sell the whole thing, either - how about a few tens of thousands of square miles? What if countries started pressuring Denmark to part with some or all of Greenland through various channels?
How would such advances be perceived by the US and how far would the US go to prevent it?
Of all the crazy ways for WWIII to start, a land grab over Greenland would be one of the strangest - at least from today's vantage point. But in just a few years, Greenland could become a flashpoint in world politics.
Also, why was this story flagged?
Lord if I know... it seems like it fits all guidelines, and I've seen no comments that object to the story itself.
Paging dang... unflag please?
Greenland and Iceland have been strategically important for US/NATO since at least WW2. Keflavik is and was an essential base for ASW (anti-submarine) patrols in the North Atlantic, a waystation for ferrying aircraft from the Americas to Europe, and a variety of other uses.
Russia establishing a military presence on Greenland would be something akin to their attempt to base ballistic missiles in Cuba in terms of US national security.
If the Danes are amenable to transferring ownership to the US, then I think it would probably make total sense from a national security perspective. It seems to me that it would be a mistake to try to include it as a state, but allowing it to continue functioning as an autonomous possession would make far more sense than even trying to make it a territory (a'la Puerto Rico or the US Virgin Islands), especially given its low population and longstanding cultural ties to Europe. The current annual subsidy from Denmark is "only" about a half billion US Dollars. The US federal budget for FY2018 was $4.094 trillion, so that would be a whopping 0.125% increase.
Thinking about it in those terms, it would make sense for the US to buy it and increase investment into their economy purely as a hedge against potential drastic climate change and to guarantee a base of military operations in the North Atlantic.
Our glorious future, in which climate change turns into an opportunity for resources companies to dig stuff out of the earth.
Watch carefully for the expansion of research bases in Antarctica to be expanded and militarised.
From here there will be a large set of public opinion that comes to see the ice covering Greenland and Antarctica as simply an obstacle to commercial opportunity, who see global heating as being a strong positive.
This is the beginning of that narrative.
Depressing.
Yes, if climate change models are remotely accurate, Greenland will become much more valuable and will attract commercial interests. I see this as a good thing, though - humanity will adapt to changing conditions. Individuals and communities will be impacted, some in positive and some in negative ways.
In short, I wouldn't see this as "now people get an opportunity to fuck up this place, too" - I see it as "the loss of natural resources in some places is offset by their gain in others".
Step 1) Buy large swaths of mostly uninhabited, mostly useless arctic land.
Step 2) Ensure global warning continues unchecked, possibly even accelerate it so that the land you just bought becomes super valuable
Step 3) profit
Step 1. Everyone in Puerto Rico registers Republican.
Step 2. Change name to Greanland.
Step 3. Two Senate Seats."After WWII, the Cold War motivated the USA to offer $100m for ownership of Greenland, which was declined. The USA got the benefit of using Greenland anyway. I discuss how the island otherwise remained a drain since, the dim prospect it will ever be useful to Denmark, and the forgone benefits of that offer. I speculate on the real reasons for the refusal."
Just wow.
"In meetings, at dinners and in passing conversations, Mr. Trump has asked advisers whether the U.S. can acquire Greenland"
"It is also unclear how the U.S. would go about acquiring Greenland even if the effort were serious. "
"It unleashed a cascade of questions among his advisers, such as whether the U.S. could use Greenland to establish a stronger military presence in the Arctic, and what kind of research opportunities it might present."
etc etc.
With past Presidents, you would have to rely on the press and insider leaks to figure out what the President was really thinking. Between his campaign rallies, and Twitter, we get a pretty unfiltered day by day view of what is on the President's mind. That can be both good and bad.