How far European Union can go to defend Greenland from Trump annexation?

After Washington talks failure, the largest island is waiting for inevitable

By Nitya Chakraborty

The Washington talks for discussing the future of Greenland failed on Wednesday with the foreign ministers of Denmark and Greenland returning back home with the message from White House that Greenland rightfully belongs to USA and Trump will be deciding on the timing of its takeover. The U.S. does not care for EU or European troops in NATO. The EU leaders, after getting such a slap from their big brother U.S. did some sabre rattling on Thursday by asking the troops of the member countries to be alert and vigilant along Greenland and cooperate with the latest exercises of the Danish troops termed Operation Arctic Endurance.

All these are nothing but optics. Trump also knows how far the EU leaders can go. French President Macron always has talked big by declaring that Greenland cannot be taken over by the U.S., Denmark is a member of the EU and NATO, this country will be defended if there is any U.S. invasion. But French officials are talking behind the scenes to work out any formula which gives additional rights to the U.S. on Greenland excepting formal take over

Soon after the U.S. invasion of Venezuela and the capture of President Nicholas Maduro, the EU nations were not that opposed to the action, only they had some reservations about the manner of Trump’s action. But on Greenland, , the EU leaders of six European powers – France, Germany, Spain, Italy, Poland and the UK – issued a rare joint statement, reaffirming their support for Danish sovereignty and, in effect, warning Trump to keep his hands off Greenland. Greenland belongs to its people, they said: “It is for Denmark and Greenland and them only, to decide on matters concerning Denmark and Greenland.

Greenland has been a semiautonomous territory since 1979, but as part of Denmark, it is defended by NATO. As the leader of NATO, certainly U.S. has some rights about ensuring the security of its troops if there is a threat from Russia or China. But the fact is that during the earlier years, the cold war treaties between Denmark and the USA for the joint defence of Greenland were in effect, the US could do that but instead, the earlier US regimes shut down 16 of the 17 military bases thinking that there was no need for stationing so many U.S. troops around Greenland. The earlier regimes felt there was no security threat from Russia and China.

The fact is that this latest move was Trump’s own bid to expand the U.S. empire in view of the island’s positioning in the Arctic Sea and the potential of the development of huge natural resources for which Russia and China are also in the fray. Both Russia and China have denied any security threat to NATO and that their patrolling in the zone is taking place as per agreement and maritime laws and there is no issue of threat to the Greenland or the stationed NATO forces. But still Trump is using this security threat excuse to take over Greenland.

Trump’s proposed actions to take over Greenland have got the support of his MAGA base as this may not involve the deployment of land troops, just coercion may get the result. But the Democrats are up in arms, they have moved among the congressmen to move a motion opposing Trump’s move. The EU leaders have talked to many Democratic Party members. Democrats say that Trump may leave after two years, but the cracks that have appeared in NATO and the expanding schism between the U.S. and its European allies have affected the mutual relations. This should not be allowed to continue.

The British Prime Minister Keir Starmer spoke with Trump twice in recent days as a deal maker on behalf of European nations. British foreign secretary is talking to the US secretary of state Marco Rubio but the diplomatic sources opine that the White House officials also are clueless. They have to depend on the thinking of Trump and its change in every hour. As a result, firm official contribution to the impasse cannot take place. All the decisions of The White House are taken by Trump himself and most of the times, the officials come to know through Trump’s social media platform only.

The European capitals, especially the EU headquarter Brussels are carrying on extensive discussions on finding out a formula to appease Trump while saving the face of the EU. It is clear to the EU that Trump is on a prowl of Greenland. He cannot be stopped but he has to be offered something tangible which will massage his ego. Starmer has instructed his foreign secretary to work on that. French officials are also doing the same. Everybody knows that EU cannot confront the U.S if Trump forces the situation in Greenland. So any alternative avoiding direct fight with the U.S. is better for the European nations.

But there are other voices in Europe favouring strong action by the European countries against the US if Trump opts for forcible occupation. For instance, Fabian Zuleeg, chief executive of the European Policy Centre in Brussels, said that Europe could, if it stuck together, show Trump that his dog-eat-dog coercion comes at a cost. He said that Europe must make “not symbolic gestures, but measures that resonate domestically in the US and hurt Trump and his policy choices where it matters most: with his political base. Trade, market access, regulatory cooperation and industrial partnerships all provide leverage.”

For Paris-based columnist Alexander Hurst, Europe’s best course of action is to force “a rupture” with the US, including telling the US to leave its European military bases. “Everything short of actual combat should be considered,” Hurst wrote, “because ‘annexing Greenland’ is a symptom of American fascism, and others will follow.” All these ideas are meant for TV viewers having little impact on the EU policy makers in the governments.

Greenland is the world’s largest island and an autonomous Danish dependent territory with self-government and its own parliament. Though a part of the continent of North America, Greenland has been politically and culturally associated with Europe – in particular the two colonial powers, Norway and Denmark – since the 9th Century. Denmark contributes two-thirds of Greenland’s budget revenue, the rest coming mainly from fishing. Potential oil, gas and rare earth mineral reserves have attracted prospecting firms.

The US has long seen Greenland as strategically important and established a radar base at Thule during the Cold War. With the melting of the ice around Greenland, the possibility of new trade routes opening has increased the Arctic’s importance.

Greenland has a population of around 57,000 in an area of 2.1 million sq. km area. Trump recently offered US$ 1 lakh to every citizen if Greenland to support the move of U.S. take over. He is talking of huge investments in Greenland to make the island richer. So, that at way at the individual level also, the US is working for takeover. For Europe, the battle is extremely difficult. It will be clear soon whether the European nations who boast of a great civilization, are able to retain their self respect in the current protracted battle over Greenland with their big brother U.S. (IPA Service)