Greenland and the Danger of Treating Trump as Rational

US President Donald Trump is not a rational actor and we need to stop treating him as such.

Nowhere is this more apparent than in his threats to annex Greenland and assume sovereignty from Denmark, by force if necessary. Like many other notions or public utterances, the idea of the United States “owning” Greenland has been on Trump’s mind for some time. There is little indication of what put the idea in his head or the original rationale. It may be – or indeed is likely – that the concept is based solely on dominance and ego, with Trump looking at a map, seeing a large sparsely populated island on the North American continent and deciding that it would look better as US property. It shouldn’t be lost on readers that this could easily be the reason behind his desire to annex Canada.

Admittedly, direct evidence for this is sparse. However, we can make some inferences from what Trump has said his reasoning is, and how that reasoning doesn’t stand up to even casual scrutiny. Essentially, Trump has stated that the United States needs Greenland for defence purposes, that Denmark has neglected Greenland’s defences, and that there is an ongoing threat from Chinese and Russian ships and submarines.

None of this is true.

The American presence in Greenland is governed by a 1951 treaty with Denmark. This agreement gives the US almost blanket authority to establish whatever defence installations it sees fit anywhere in the protectorate. At one time, during the Cold War, the US had some 15,000 personnel stationed across Greenland, manning airbases, radar installations, and research facilities. American cuts have reduced this to some 150 US Space Force personnel manning the ballistic missile warning system facility at Pituffik (formerly Thule). There are no longer any flying units at this base and the US maintains no combat units in Greenland.

It’s important to note that the 1951 agreement does not commit Denmark to defending Greenland on its own. Indeed, the essence of the treaty is that defence is largely left to the United States. Surely if there was an immediate threat, the first thing the US would do would be to increase its presence. This would be a routine and uncontroversial thing to do. Yet that has not happened — because there has been no increase in either the Russian or Chinese threat. Their ships are not “circling” Greenland as Trump would have us believe. There is no threat of invasion. There’s been no sudden uptick in overflights or testing of air defence zones.

And we would know. The so-called Greenland–Iceland–UK Gap is intensely monitored by NATO. Canada maintains surveillance of its own over the Western Atlantic. Commercial ship trackers are available to the public, as are flight trackers. None of these have shown an increase in hostile activity. Moreover, Denmark, in response to US threats and accusations, has dramatically increased its spending for Greenland’s defence and has procured new platforms specifically for that mission.

In other words, Trump is lying about his reasons for wanting Greenland under the US thumb. He can have everything he wants simply by asking, yet that doesn’t seem good enough.

Many commentators have attempted to rationalize Trump’s designs on the Danish territory. We’re to believe that it’s about rare minerals or a grand strategy to control the Arctic. Trump hasn’t mentioned these himself and he’s not exactly known for keeping his thoughts close to the vest. He’s also not known for strategic thinking. Greenland’s mineral potential is largely unsurveyed and much of it still lies under the ice shelf, despite the encroachment of global warming. Moreover, Denmark and Greenland have hardly hindered attempts to explore for any potential mineral wealth; yet again, Trump can get what he wants simply by asking.

There are, of course, other strategic reasons that may drive Trump’s desire to own Greenland: domination of the Arctic. Possession of Greenland may go some way towards achieving this goal – if it is a goal at all. So far, there is no real evidence that Trump has thought this deeply. Northern Greenland is dominated by a massive ice shelf and is largely inaccessible. The landmass is too distant from the Northwest Passage to exert much influence, and Greenland does not possess the population or infrastructure to support a large-scale military presence without the investment of hundreds of billions of dollars.

We’re left with an uncomfortable truth. Trump wants Greenland because it is another means of displaying American dominance, because it demonstrates his vision of a world in which the great powers rule over “spheres of influence”, and because his ego and hubris have decided that he – personally – deserves it. This worldview is incompatible with NATO by definition, not just in practice. There is no grand strategy; this is Trump having an idea and now trying to follow through on it. In Trump’s new world, might makes right, allies are expendable, and every move is a transaction. If Greenland can’t be bought, it’ll be taken simply because the United States can.

The danger is very real, perhaps acute. Trump has been emboldened by his “victory” in Venezuela and has demonstrated increasing disdain for multilateralism and for international norms. This especially extends to Europe for some reason and he may view his Greenland gambit as an easy way to discredit both the European Union and NATO. He may be making a grave error. The language coming out of Denmark and the EU (and, somewhat later, Canada) has become increasingly firm and tolerance for American threats is vanishing quickly. There are now reports via the Daily Telegraph that the EU is considering drastic sanctions should the US launch a military incursion into Greenland, including bans on US tech firms and the eviction of US military installations.

Further, Denmark has stated that a military operation against Greenland would destroy NATO, a point which is undoubtedly true. It’s easy to anticipate NATO being reconstituted as an organization without American participation.

This leaves Canada in an incredibly difficult position. Canadians will, by a large majority, expect the country to stand with Denmark. Indeed, Ottawa was uncharacteristically clear in denouncing US threats and reiterating Greenland’s right to self-determination. Should the US persist with the unthinkable, Canada’s situation will become much more complex. It is virtually impossible for Canada to pivot away from the US to the extent required in the time available. Moreover, our defence system is completely intertwined with that of the United States through NORAD. As I’ve maintained for some time, NORAD exists primarily to defend the US and no American government would take a Canadian withdrawal lightly.

It is difficult to predict how this will play out. Canada is likely to try to walk a tightrope, adopting increasingly pro-Denmark and NATO positions publicly and diplomatically while trying to keep economic and defence relations with the US on an even keel. This will not sit well with the still vocal minority that either supports Trump or cannot conceive of a hostile United States. Worse, there is serious potential that the US will attempt to leverage the Alberta separation movement to destabilize Canada in combination with economic coercion. Indeed, we already see reports of separatist leaders visiting Washington, cap in hand. Even attempted US interference would have chilling effects, regardless of success.

There is one saving grace: even the US isn’t omnipotent. Trump is threatening military action across the globe and the US military is seriously stretched. It is maintaining a full Carrier Strike Group in the Caribbean, troops in Europe, threatening Iran with strikes, conducting airstrikes against ISIS in Iraq and Syria, launching missiles against (somewhat suspect) targets in Nigeria, conducting a shadow campaign in Somalia, and maintaining thousands of troops in East Asia. Combine this with reports that the Joint Chiefs of Staff are uneasy with the legality of unprovoked aggression against Denmark and Greenland, and the picture isn’t as simple as some in the US would have it.

Unfortunately, Trump is a linear, simple thinker who thinks in terms of dominance and ego. If US Generals don’t go along with his plans for Greenland, he’ll undoubtedly find some who will. Forces for a Greenland operation will be dug up, likely from the Special Operations community. And Trump will have his way. But getting his way means he will destroy the international order as we’ve known it since 1945 and he will make the US into a pariah state.

The problem is that he doesn’t care.