From Acquisition to Armed Conflict? Four Ways the US "Controls" Greenland

US President Trump said in a Monday phone interview with NBC News that he would not comment on whether he would use military means to seize Greenland, but at the same time emphasized that if the US fails to achieve its goals on the Greenland issue, it will not hesitate to impose comprehensive tariffs on European countries.

Trump's interest in Greenland is not new. As early as his first presidential term, he openly expressed his desire to incorporate Greenland into the US territory, even describing it as a "huge real estate deal." In his second term, his tone became even more hardened, repeatedly warning that if the US does not take action, Russia or China may expand their influence in the Arctic region, which Washington cannot accept.

What are the possible ways the US could "control" Greenland?

"Al Jazeera" analysis states that the first method is to influence public opinion in Greenland through economic incentives, including directly providing high subsidies to local residents to encourage them to break away from Denmark.

The second method is to try to "buy" Greenland through formal transactions. Although Denmark and Greenland have repeatedly made it clear that the island is not a commodity for sale. According to a recent report by CBS, a member of Congress and an informed source stated that US Secretary of State Marco Rubio told Congress that purchasing Greenland was the government's preferred option, but any funding must be approved by Congress, and acquiring the island through a treaty requires the support of two-thirds of the Senate and EU approval.

The third method is the most controversial military option. The US has not ruled it out, but this move would inevitably cause serious damage to the NATO system and transatlantic relations. If the US were to wage war and annex Greenland, it would directly violate NATO clauses.

In addition, Reuters disclosed another relatively indirect possibility: establishing a "free association agreement" with Greenland similar to those between the US and some Pacific island nations. Under such arrangements, the US would be responsible for defense and security, in exchange for strategic influence and military deployment space. However, theoretically, Greenland would still need to first break away from Denmark. Currently, the US has such agreements with the Federated States of Micronesia, the Republic of the Marshall Islands, and the Republic of Palau.

However, multiple polls show that the Greenland society generally opposes becoming part of the US; the support for using force to seize Greenland within the US is also extremely low. This station previously reported that even some Republicans have condemned Trump's attempt to "annex" the territory of the Kingdom of Denmark.

Leaders of France, Germany, Sweden, and Norway have all stated that threats and intimidation should not appear between allies, and that the future of Greenland can only be decided by the people of Greenland and Denmark themselves. The EU has called for calm dialogue while clearly stating that if the US actually implements tariff measures, the EU is ready with countermeasures to protect its own economic interests.

For the US, Greenland Island has a key strategic location, being the shortest route from North America to Europe. The US has expressed its intention to expand its military presence in Greenland Island and plans to deploy radar in the waters connecting Greenland Island, Iceland, and the UK, to counter Russia and China. In addition, Greenland Island also contains rich mineral resources, including rare earths, and may also have large reserves of oil and natural gas.

Original: toutiao.com/article/1854836886968539/

Statement: This article represents the views of the author alone.