Trump’s Greenland Deal Looks Much Like the Old One*
U.S. President Donald Trump has hailed a repackaged 75-year-old agreement with Greenland as a new triumph. It’s welcome news inasmuch as he no longer wants to annex the island.
Trump is never short of a superlative, and this occasion was no exception. The president wrote of “a dream come true for the United States of America” in his announcement that the U.S. had reached a deal with Denmark regarding Greenland. The agreement would give the U.S. the right to maintain a permanent military presence on the Arctic island, while at the same time no other military powers would be able to establish bases on Greenland or invest in sensitive sectors there without Washington's express written approval.
An Utterly Pointless Dispute
It sounds fine and dandy. With luck, it will draw a line under one of the most pointless disputes of the last year and a half. At least Trump is no longer making territorial claims on this immense, resource-rich and strategically important island.
Yet the substance of the agreement is not exactly brand new. A bilateral treaty on Greenland’s defense has been in place between the United States and Denmark since 1951. Its provisions already allow the Americans to operate as many military bases as they want on the island. And no time limit applies to the arrangement. Furthermore, for the last 75 years, U.S. forces in the area have been granted every conceivable freedom of movement and access. And, of course, the implication that neither the Russians nor the Chinese were going to establish military bases on NATO territory has also been clear for the last 75 years.
Outmaneuvered by the Danes
The Danes skillfully outmaneuvered Trump by bringing out a refreshed version of an old agreement. Evidently, this works fine for him (and everyone else), as long as the American president can spin it as a historic victory.
Perhaps we can learn something from this approach. The next time things turn fractious within the transatlantic alliance, NATO members could simply present Trump with a new copy of the 1949 North Atlantic Treaty for his signature. Or Canada and Mexico could apply a little fresh ink to the 1990s-era North American Free Trade Agreement, with a view to talking Trump out of imposing those high tariffs. Wait a minute, though! Trump had himself already replaced NAFTA with the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement during his first presidency in 2020, only to break it again in his second term. A contract is nothing but a piece of paper to the man. And that problem is going to continue for as long as he remains in office.
*Editor's note: This article is available in its original language with a paid subscription.
Trump is never short of a superlative, and this occasion was no exception. The president wrote of “a dream come true for the United States of America” in his announcement that the U.S. had reached a deal with Denmark regarding Greenland. The agreement would give the U.S. the right to maintain a permanent military presence on the Arctic island, while at the same time no other military powers would be able to establish bases on Greenland or invest in sensitive sectors there without Washington's express written approval.
An Utterly Pointless Dispute
It sounds fine and dandy. With luck, it will draw a line under one of the most pointless disputes of the last year and a half. At least Trump is no longer making territorial claims on this immense, resource-rich and strategically important island.
Yet the substance of the agreement is not exactly brand new. A bilateral treaty on Greenland’s defense has been in place between the United States and Denmark since 1951. Its provisions already allow the Americans to operate as many military bases as they want on the island. And no time limit applies to the arrangement. Furthermore, for the last 75 years, U.S. forces in the area have been granted every conceivable freedom of movement and access. And, of course, the implication that neither the Russians nor the Chinese were going to establish military bases on NATO territory has also been clear for the last 75 years.
Outmaneuvered by the Danes
The Danes skillfully outmaneuvered Trump by bringing out a refreshed version of an old agreement. Evidently, this works fine for him (and everyone else), as long as the American president can spin it as a historic victory.
Perhaps we can learn something from this approach. The next time things turn fractious within the transatlantic alliance, NATO members could simply present Trump with a new copy of the 1949 North Atlantic Treaty for his signature. Or Canada and Mexico could apply a little fresh ink to the 1990s-era North American Free Trade Agreement, with a view to talking Trump out of imposing those high tariffs. Wait a minute, though! Trump had himself already replaced NAFTA with the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement during his first presidency in 2020, only to break it again in his second term. A contract is nothing but a piece of paper to the man. And that problem is going to continue for as long as he remains in office.
*Editor's note: This article is available in its original language with a paid subscription.
Previous article![]( "The Tide Is Turning for Trump")
