Why Greenland is of growing strategic significance
twz.com
twz.com
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1968_Thule_Air_Base_B-52_crash... ("Thulegate" political scandal" (1968))
I don't fully agree with their thesis. I think the "nuclear war" aspect is a lot *less* strategic now then it was in the 1950-60's: "over the Arctic" is no longer the primary missile path, like it was in the early technology era. Many of them are deployed on submarines, which can launch at their target from any direction; and there are (now or soon) larger[1] land-based missiles that have enough range to go around the planet the long way, e.g. attacking the US from the south. This is, in part, strategic response to the early focus on the Arctic—both to the detection radars, and to active anti-missile defenses.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fractional_Orbital_Bombardment... ("Fractional Orbital Bombardment System")
edit: And moreover, there's now satellite-based infrared sensors[2] that see rocket launches anywhere on Earth, instantly—something the early Cold War did not have. Radar is no longer the exclusive, or first, way to detect a first-strike.
I doubt the US likes that. Although they don't exactly need official control to station military assets there Trump/someone in the bureaucracy might think that official control is a better long term plan. Especially since NATO is under a little pressure right now.
EDIT Also, a classic Simpsons moment [0] springs to mind as Denmark expresses outrage at the idea of selling Greenland.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/aug/18/trump-consider...
Yes, it hasn’t been brought up during the last four years because he wasn’t president. Now that he’ll be president again it’s suddenly relevant.
https://euromaidanpress.com/2025/01/13/danish-intelligence-r...
In his press conference Trump mentioned the world map multiple times. Trump may well be forming his annexation ambitions based on what the map would look like after the annexation. Well, the world map looks very different based on what kind of projection you use. In the Mercator projection Greenland looks big. Bigger than the US, in fact. This may be what is attracting Trump, as it looks like a lot of real estate. Tobler hyperelliptical projection on the other hand makes Greenland look small. Someone should show Trump this projection and it may very well cause him to lose interest, and we can sidestep a dispute with Denmark and Europe.
I honestly have no idea how basic math (sphere to flat projection) escapes people.
Control of the Northwest Passage, maybe?
Yes and No.
Most effective trajectory to reach Russia from US (or vice versa) is really over Arctic region.
But in USSR created ICBMs with capabilities to reach US over Antarctic region, and even semi-orbital ICBM R-36 orb (it is large and expensive and not in production now, but Russia have all drawings so could design modern remake).
And Israel created space rockets, which launched to west (usually space rockets, launched to east), because unfriendly countries on east side could make wrong considerations if Israel launch to east.
So, as I said, yes, most effective trajectory via North pole region, but years ago produced rockets, which could hit US from any direction.
He wants to control/profit from all East/West trade.
Denmark has been a a big Ally of the US, including a military alliance. These words used to mean something, right?
Denmark has played ball with the USA over the years, so if the US wanted to invest in Greenland or set up military facilities, surely a few meetings and agreements would do the work.
This sounds more like about legacy, sadly in a typical imperialist way.
If a US elected leader is willing to take their allies land by force out of greed, that will be the beginning of the end.
In fact, just the fact that this conversation is happening out in the open signals the beginning of the end.
European countries need their nuclear deterrence and they need it ASAP.
Imo it makes all littoral / near shore naval assets a sitting duck. Deepwater is probably safe for about another five years.
Even stealth submarines may be fundamentally vulnerable to a flotilla of drone submarines and ai detection. I'll give them ten years.
I used to think Zeihans prediction of a collapse of global trade because of piracy and the US shrinking from global sea police was loony, but drone threats may be what really does it.
The Ukraine was invaded for resources.
Ukraine have strategy geography to limit access of Russia to black sea, so for Russia free access stay only on Baltic sea and far east (Vladivostok and Kuril islands, too far to be effectively used by European part of country).
Now, from international law, Russia control near half of Arctic region, and other divided by weak counties - Canada, Denmark (via their control of Greenland).
If US will gain formal juridical control of Greenland (or hypothetical of Canada), they will automatically gain large part of Arctic region and will directly compete against Russia.
Add Canada as new US State, is not a subject now, but for Greenland things are unclear.
One of the surprising things about the Ukraine war was the successful sea war by Ukraine, forcing the Black Sea fleet outside of Ukraine’s range. But I think with "strategic geography" meant peace time. In war time Russia would have problems with three other NATO members on the Black Sea and above all with the Bosporus.
I must admit harbour at Novorossiysk, but not Sochi, because it is where putin like to spent time on sea coast, so there economy activity is severe limited for safety.
Second, only far east harbours are opened near whole year, but north harbours and black sea, have significant time in ice, near every year.
BTW interest observation - from begin of war in 2022, we have not seen normal winters, all winters was anomaly warm, with very short frost periods.
Control Crimea and coast of azov sea is important, because Russia have powerful internal water routes via azov sea. For example, when Russian black sea warship need some deep maintenance, they use rivers network to reach service facilities in deep country.
It is luck for Ukraine, that we have huge part of azov sea coasts, with Mariupol, one of largest steel enterprise of the world and also big port (sure, I mean we control them before war).
For Russians, Mariupol was hidden threat, they constantly fear that Ukraine will use power to block Russians from enter sea from Don.
Following the news feels more and more like watching a very entertaining tv show, especially with all the plot twists.
Also, we need annex all the territory south of the st lawrence river and divide it amongst new york, vermont, new hampshire and maine. It wouldn't require too much work. Just extend the borders of these states vertically north to the st lawrence river.
Edit: Honestly what was flag worthy about my comment? It's insane what triggers people.
You could imagine someone from the biggest city in washington moving to the biggest city in alaska? Amazing.
> I can't imagine a New York guy moving to Greenland.
Sure. But someone from new york would fit in better in anchorage since it actually snows and gets cold in new york during the winter. Unlike seattle.
The strategic importance is just a decoy. The US could put as many bases they wanted just by asking nicely.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Azorian#Building_Gloma...
It's all a bit nuts. Has any other US president gone territorial expansionist like this?
Trump threatening to take military action against Greenland due to its strategic military importance legitimizes Russia's invasion of Ukraine "for strategic military importance". Whether Trump follows through or not, suddenly Russia has a defensible position because: look America the land of the free wants to do the same thing.
Anyone trying to spin in knots trying to come up with an alternative justification will do just that, because there is no sane reason otherwise. Denmark is an ally, and all indications are they will remain an ally as long as a democratically elected government is running the US that upholds western ideals.
Has the WH been compromised?
1. Putin suggested it to him at some point, because he knew it would cause chaos among the Western alliance bloc.
2. Mercator projection. It looks big on a map, therefore he wants it.
The second one is along the same lines as his obvious confusion about the word "asylum" - if you watch how he talks about refugees, he obviously doesn't know the difference between "mental asylum" and "political asylum", and thinks that people seeking refuge in the United States are all nuts. The man is really, really, really evil, but he's also really, really, really dumb.