Situated in the northernmost extremities of our planet, inhabited by only a smattering of citizens, and covered mostly by snow and ice, lies the world’s largest island. Owned by the Kingdom of Denmark as a semi-autonomous territory, this island’s citizens are used to keeping to themselves, as residents of one of the most isolated places on Earth.
The name of this island, as you may have surmised, is Greenland. Recently, the Greenlandic people have found themselves the unlikely subject of a flurry of international conversation. For reasons best known to himself, Donald J. Trump, newly re-elected President of the United States, has decided that he wants the U.S. to take ownership of Greenland. The President’s re-accession to the Oval Office was constructed on promises of “fixing” the economy, “ending” inflation, and “solving” immigration; thus, Trump’s yuletide announcement that the American acquisition of Greenland was necessary for “world freedom” came as a surprise for Americans and foreigners alike. It remains unclear how the possession of Greenland will address issues such as inflation and illegal immigration.
In the wake of Trump’s Greenlandic proclamation, many thought that he was merely joking; Trump is known to make hyperbolical promises that rarely, if ever, come to fruition. However, it quickly became apparent that the President wasn’t joking.
Trump has continued to assert his desire for Greenland in speeches, press conferences, and social media posts. Ownership of the island even made an appearance in his inaugural speech. Depressingly, Greenland isn’t the only subject of Trump’s increasingly impersonalistic rhetoric. Trump has expressed a desire to take control of the Panama Canal, has dubbed Canada the “51st state,” and impertinently referred to Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau as “governor.”
Foreign leaders have been quick to condemn Trump’s comments. Danish leaders have repeatedly asserted that Greenland is not for sale. The Panamanians have done likewise in regard to their canal.
On the surface, Trump’s remarks may seem like the puerile and profitless, but nonetheless harmless, comments of a man known to derive satisfaction from excessive attention. However, Trump, acting with a mulish recklessness, has refused to rule out the use of military force to acquire Greenland and the Panama Canal. Indeed, Panamese officials began to brace for an American invasion “with many casualties” last month. Across the pond, the European Union has pledged “full support” to Denmark against American hostility, and the French have already begun to ready troops to send to Greenland.
Allow this to set in. We may go to war with some of our closest allies over Greenland and the Panama Canal. This may turn out to be the most harebrained and imbecilic scheme of the twenty-first century. Skating over the mass amount of casualties and economic upheaval these wars would cause, do you not think that invading a close ally of ours may effectively dissuade them from partnering with us, be it economically or militarily, in the future? Donald Trump has pushed a narrative that establishes the United States as a self-reliant nation, rather like an overly confident preschooler who runs away from home with the belief that they can provide for themselves. We need our allies to facilitate trade and protect against foreign adversaries. Estranging ourselves from them, sacrificing decades of careful diplomacy, would lead to our imminent demise.
On a separate but related note, what has inspired Trump’s newfound obsession with Greenland? Some have suggested that the President may be laboring under a delusion about Greenland’s genuine size. Because Earth is round, projecting its topography onto a flat surface is a Sisyphean task; thus, no map can accurately depict the true size of Earth’s landmasses. As a result, on a map, landmasses become increasingly distorted the farther they are from the equator. Greenland, at the top of the world, appears to be roughly the size of the African continent on a map; in reality, Africa is 14 times larger. Trump, who is known to be attracted by greatness and grandeur, may be tempted by Greenland because of its apparent, but inflated, vastness.
In a meeting with the Danish prime minister, which has been described as “fiery” and “like a cold shower,” Trump, acting with apparent vindictiveness, demanded that Denmark hand over Greenland, and threatened the country with high tariffs if they failed to cooperate. This approach to foreign policy is morally corrupt. It is not acceptable, nor should it be, to bully smaller countries into doing what we want of them. This behavior is expected of pre-pubescent children, not the President of the United States of America.
Perhaps I would be less critical of Trump’s bizarre Greenlandic obsession if its people were in support of American ownership. That, however, is not the reality of the situation. According to a poll conducted by research company Verian, only six percent of Greenlanders support joining the U.S., with an overwhelming ninety-four percent being opposed or ambivalent to American proprietorship.
Frankly, I cannot blame the Greenlandic people. I, too, would be wary of inheriting our country’s myriad of problems, including a dysfunctional healthcare system, unchecked access to weapons, and a leader whom I believe is scarcely qualified for the office which he holds.
I am sure that many of my readers are skeptical of the possibility of a war between America and Greenland. To those individuals: this time five years ago, would you have believed that, in just a few short weeks, we would be catapulted into a global pandemic that would last over two years and permanently alter the course of humanity?
At this juncture, only one thing is certain: if President Trump’s second term in office were to be a ballet, this would be act one, scene one. The orchestra has just begun the overture, and latecomers are still trickling into their seats. In other words, the show has only just begun. Only time will tell how serious Trump is about his North American territorial aspirations.
