‘Greenland belongs to the people of Greenland’
Romain Chuffart and Rachael Lorna Johnstone write:
In recent days, Donald Trump’s comments regarding Greenland and the informal visit of his son Donald Trump Jr. have reignited discussions about sovereignty, geopolitics, and international law. During his previous presidency, Trump floated the idea of purchasing Greenland in 2019, which at the time was widely dismissed as an absurd proposition. Both Greenlandic and Danish governments stated that Greenland was not for sale and that the Greenlanders were in command of their own future. Reviving the issue, Trump now insists that American ‘ownership and control’ over Greenland is an ‘absolute necessity.’ When asked, Trump refused to rule out the use of force to bring Greenland under U.S. control. This statement, whether hyperbolic or serious, raises pressing questions about the role of international law, the Arctic’s strategic importance, and Greenland’s independence.
Trump’s latest remarks shift from the 2019 narrative of purchasing Greenland to asserting control over it. While his comments about not ruling out the use of force may be seen as inflammatory and were made in response to a question regarding both Greenland and the Panama Canal, they reflect a broader pattern of prioritizing U.S. interests over international norms. This rhetoric has understandably caused alarm in Greenland and beyond. Having reiterated that ‘Greenland belongs to the people of Greenland,’ Mute Egede, Prime Minister of Greenland called for a calm and unified response.
The suggestion of military intervention has drawn parallels to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. However, the comparison is not exact. Greenland is not (yet) a sovereign state under international law, but an autonomous territory within the Kingdom of Denmark. The Greenlanders are recognised as a ‘People’ in international law, with full rights to determine their own future. A pathway to complete independence, or other change in status is laid out in the Self Government Act. In short, and it should be repeated ad nauseum, Greenland cannot simply be bought or acquired from Denmark. Rather, the U.S. and other States or international organisations are invited to collaborate with Greenland as equal partners. Any use of force by one NATO state against another would not only violate international law but also strain U.S. credibility on the global stage. European leaders have reiterated their commitment to defending Greenland’s sovereignty, in turn upholding and reinforcing international law. [Continue reading…]
Ken Howery is a quiet, unassuming tech investor who prioritizes discretion. And yet, he has ended up in the middle of two of the noisiest story lines of the incoming Trump administration.
One is the expanding ambition of Elon Musk, Mr. Howery’s close friend and fellow party-scene fixture since the two helped run PayPal 25 years ago.
The other is the expansionist ambition of Mr. Musk’s boss, President-elect Donald J. Trump, who has set his sights on buying Greenland, the world’s largest island.
As Mr. Trump’s pick for ambassador to Denmark, Mr. Howery is expected to be central to what Mr. Trump hopes will be a real-estate deal of epic proportions. The only hitch is that Denmark, which counts Greenland as its autonomous territory, says the island is not for sale.
Whether he likes it or not, Mr. Howery, a globe-trotter known for his taste for adventure and elaborate party planning, is likely to find himself in the middle of a geopolitical tempest. [Continue reading…]