The Arctic Circle is heating up again |
The sparsely populated island of Greenland has become the focus of much media attention. The star of the show, as always, is President Donald Trump, who has signaled his willingness to buy Greenland in a way that is unorthodox, yet by now seems to settle for a framework that will grant Washington greater access to the island for years to come. Immediately, it led to fiery reactions from his opponents in the United States, protests in Greenland and Denmark, frantic discussions on European talkshows and news channels, and social media was abuzz.
Back to the past
Trump has done it again. Initially, he hinted that economic and even military force might be used to acquire Greenland, if he was denied the opportunity to buy it. Some pundits would argue that this is his trademark: say something outrageous, ruffle some feathers, tone down the rhetoric, and try to get a deal that benefits the United States. Perhaps, that is the case and Trump simply enjoys stirring the pot, such as through uploading an AI picture of him lecturing in front of a map with Greenland and Canada draped in an American flag. And while he might consider his unpredictability a useful negotiating tool, it has led to serious concern among the US’ close allies in Europe. At Davos, he argued that he simply wanted Greenland for national security, as the Danes could not be expected to defend this “piece of ice” effectively. Greenlanders were understandably shocked and staged protests that they were not for sale. In addition, Denmark showed its solidarity, by staging protests in Copenhagen, complete with Greenlandic and Danish flags – indeed, is this the way the United States treats an ally, one that sent soldiers to fight in Afghanistan, both Danish and Greenlandic?
Could this be an eastward version of Manifest Destiny, the concept that was popularized in the nineteenth century about the United States’ need to expand from sea to shining sea, based on a combination of moral, republican, and even divine arguments? Not really, because Trump used none of these to defend his offer to buy the “piece of ice.” In Davos, he simply argued that it was necessary for American national security, as he would like to build his Golden Dome there. But the offer to buy land is historically, of course, not novel at all in the case of the United States.
Think of Thomas Jefferson’s Louisiana Purchase; or the Gadsden Purchase; and President Abraham Lincoln’s Secretary of State William Henry Seward was both a staunch abolitionist and believer in Manifest Destiny, who dreamed of buying Alaska and Caribbean islands – he lived to see the former, not the latter. Moreover, in the 1850s Seward openly stated that Canada would one day join the United States, as referenced by Canadian historian John Boyko in his book Blood and Daring, which analyzes Canada’s role in the American Civil War. Though Canada and the United States would become close allies throughout the twentieth century – that alliance has become more tense in recent years – the nineteenth century was mostly characterized by border tensions and American dreams of annexation. So, no wonder Canadians become anxious when Trump posts pictures of Canada as American territory. But, in the case of Greenland, Trump’s desire for it is not new either.
A historically coveted island
Trump already offered to buy Greenland in 2019, during his first term. Back then, Greenland and Denmark flatly refused. Today, the same answer was sent to Washington: Danish territory is not for sale. But was that always the........