…because it is petty and disgusting….and unethical, of course.
President Trump Truth Socialed this out at the end of last week:
BREAKING NEWS: I am pleased to announce that the United States of America has entered into an Agreement with The Kingdom of Denmark, and Greenland, that gives the United States permanent control over security, and all other needs, in Greenland, completely addressing ALL of our many U.S. concerns.
There will be NO COST to the United States! At my direction, we worked with representatives of Denmark and Greenland to guarantee that the United States will FOREVER have the complete ability to do what is necessary in Greenland in order to secure and defend the security of Greenland, and the United States of America.
Additionally, from now on, no U.S. adversary can EVER have a base in Greenland, have a military presence in Greenland, or make sensitive investments in Greenland, without our express written approval.
For over 100 years, Presidents have known the strategic importance of Greenland, but NONE of them were able to do anything about it. I am proud to be the President that permanently and conclusively addressed this very important situation. This is an “Infinite Life” Agreement, there is no end! We are very honored and proud of what has just taken place, and everything agreed to today will be cherished by the American People.
We will immediately begin the process of developing a large Military presence in the appropriate part of Greenland, of which there are many. We will work with the people of Greenland in its development and construction. This solution is a great one for the United States of America, Denmark, Greenland, and all of our Allies. We look forward to working with the wonderful people of Denmark and Greenland toward a magnificent future with respect to this large, and highly strategic, parcel of land. We will be very protective of it!
This is a dream come true for the United States of America, one that is very important, historic, and special. Thank you for your attention to this matter!
President DONALD J. TRUMP
Also last week, ancient crooner and current Fifties station disc jockey for Sirius-XM Pat Boone respectfully suggested, as a passionate Trump supporter, that President Trump should shut up more often. Of course that’s good advice, and also futility exemplified. In the President’s defense, however, he feels that he has to salute himself because the Axis news media won’t report honestly on his successes, which have been considerable. Getting what Trump wanted out Greenland proved that his meat-axe negotiating style worked to the U.S.’s advantage after all the mockery and nastiness from the Democrats and the Trump Deranged. Here’s how the news media covered it:
The New York Times said, “U.S. Has Reached Security Deal on Greenland, Trump Says — The full contours of the deal were unclear, but Denmark and Greenland both indicated they expected an agreement to be signed soon.” trump made the “contours” pretty clear, I thought: It costs us nothing, it is permanent, the U.S. can build military bases, and to all intends and purposes, the U.S. has control of that big chunk of ice.
The Washington Post reported, “Trump hails Greenland security deal that falls short of takeover.” The U.S. doesn’t want or need ownership, but the Post has to frame Trump’s success as a failure. Nice.
The Economist sniffed: “Donald Trump drops demands to own Greenland, but the harm has been done.”
Bloomberg reported, “U.S. Strikes Greenland Deal to End Row That Threatened NATO.” That’s certainly misleading framing. Here’s The Atlantic: “The Greenland Fiasco Stumbles to an End.” How exactly is it a fiasco if the U.S. gets what it wanted? “President Trump announced an agreement that appeared to satisfy all parties but came at a great cost,” the magazine continued. Not monetary cost: what is the rag talking about? Oh: the episode got Denmark annoyed at us? The Horror.
The President may have scored a victory with major implications for U.S. security, but we shouldn’t be distracted from the more serious problem: the Kennedy Center is closing down for repairs.
A new axiom: All good Trump news is bad news.
Some people are neurologically gifted with the ability to have conversations in puns. Some people giggle at the end of every sentence. Trump seems to have a grammatical tick which tacks on some type of cartoonish superlative flourish.
Social Media talking points are spreading that Trump did not get anything that our previous agreements regarding Greenland didn’t provide. I suspect these arguments are disingenuous but don’t know enough about the earlier agreements to understand what has changed.
I’d bet if this were a non-event, the usual suspects would be on it like white on rice and every “Greenland expert” would be running around to every studio in town to crow about it.
Here’s a chart I found on X:
https://x.com/Michael7ucci/status/2102440808192635300/photo/1
Trump needs this to be a big deal because last week was so horrible for him. If you read commentary by people who actually know what they’re talking about, this agreement did not give the U.S. anything we did not have before. The Danes would never have allowed Russian or Chinese bases to be built or allowed investments from those countries. In fact, if anything it guarantees the sovereignty and self-determination of the people of Greenland, which he could have granted without grotesque memes of him looming over the island or them mobilizing for an invasion. He doesn’t want us talking about the war, or gas prices, or his son’s Russian wedding party, or the Post Office ruling by the Supreme Court. But every time we go to the grocery store or the gas station, we remember.
“The Danes would never have allowed Russian or Chinese bases to be built or allowed investments from those countries.”
In competent national diplomacy, one never trusts that any country will “never” do something damaging and dangerous. I once might have written, “Great Britain would never prosecute citizens for social media posts….”
Trump would want people talking about the war if the Left had not turned 90% anti-Israel and anti-Semitic, and wasn’t cheering for a brutal, anti-female, dictatorship that wants to destroy that country and ours. I’ll pay higher gas prices for a while to eliminate the threat posed by Iran: my folks’ families had gas rationed while we were trying to rid the world of another anti-Semitic, aspiring world domination regime in World War II.
Feel free to throw the mic down when and where you wish.
“But every time we go to the grocery store or the gas station, we remember.”
Funniest thing; under Biden and Kacklin’ “Bidenomics is WORKING!” Kamala when inflation was 3_Flippin’_Times what is is now, craven Lefty responded:
Inflation Is Transitory/There Is No Inflation/You Don’t Understand Inflation/Putin Price Hikes/War Profiteering/Global Pandemic Recovery/Shrinkflation/EVIL Righty Won’t Bring Inflation Down/Inflation Is Transitory/ad infinitum-ad nauseum.
PWS
For Trump this is a measured announcement. Not nearly as flamboyant as his usual. Self congratulatory, but also respectful, appreciative, and patriotic with just a moderate dig at his predecessors. Not bad at all.
Here’s a nice summary by a commentator I follow closely:
“Looks like what happened was: Trump: “We’re going to buy Greenland!” Denmark: “Absolutely not, Greenland is not for sale! But you can have it for free”
Long story short – which may surprise some – the Danes lied the most: Trump is pretty much correct in saying that this new deal grants the US control of Greenland. Let’s look into what changed compared to the 1951 deal.
1) This is now a permanent arrangement: whereas the existing 1951 deal only lasted as long as NATO existed, this one “does not have an end date and may only be amended by mutual consent.” It even survives a hypothetical future independence of Greenland: in that event, Denmark and Greenland must ensure that the independent Greenlandic state “affirmatively assume[s] all of the rights and obligations of the Kingdom of Denmark specified in this Agreement.”
2) In the 1951 agreement, the US could set up bases only where both governments agreed, and only on the basis of NATO planning. The new deal locks in three bases: the US can “modernize and expand its activities” at Pituffik, its only base in Greenland until now, and “shall be allowed to establish an additional Defense Area at Narsarsuaq and Mestersvig.” Further bases beyond these 3 can be justified by the defense of “the American continent,” a US interest rather than a NATO one. Also, quite subtle but this is interesting: Article IV(iii) says that “the United States may establish additional defense areas in Greenland” and that consultations are then held “to decide implementation details based on mutual agreement.” What this means is that the principle of a new base is automatically granted and only the implementation details require agreement. Article VII also gives the US “the right to raise concerns regarding construction, or change of use” of any building near a US base, after which the parties decide together what to do. Which means that the US has a say over civilian planning around its bases.
3) On US military movement across Greenland, the wording change between the 1951 agreement and this new one is quite funny. The 1951 text said (Art. V(3)): the US “may enjoy… the right of free access to and movement between the defense areas through Greenland, including territorial waters, by land, air and sea,” but only “in accordance with general rules mutually agreed upon and issued by the appropriate Danish authority in Greenland.” The new one says: “the United States of America shall enjoy… the right of free access to and movement between the Defense Areas through Greenland, including the Territorial Waters, by land, air and sea.” That’s it: “May” becomes “shall,” and the US military movement no longer has to follow rules “issued by the appropriate Danish authority in Greenland.” The US also gets something new on top: “undersea access to and movement within the Territorial Waters,” i.e. submarines.
4) Non-NATO exclusion: non-NATO states are barred from military installations or a persistent presence in Greenland unless all three parties approve, giving the US an effective permanent veto. The 1951 deal had no equivalent clause.
5) Investment screening: this is entirely new. “States or investors from a state that is not a member of NATO, a NATO partner, or an EU member state” (i.e. Russia, China, India, the Gulf States, etc.), “shall not be allowed to have (i) control, (ii) significant influence, or (iii) access to non-public information…within Particularly Sensitive Sectors or Activities in the territory of Greenland (including the Territorial Waters), unless agreed between the Parties.” Again, it basically means that the US has a permanent veto over who can invest in strategic sectors in Greenland, as far as non-NATO or EU states are concerned.
6) Lastly, in stark contrast with the 1951 deal, the framing of the deal changes significantly: this new deal is largely framed around the US. The 1951 agreement existed only “for the benefit of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization.” The new one lists the defense of “the American continent” as an objective, celebrates “the irreplaceable role” of the United States military as well as “the United States’ indispensable historical and ongoing contributions to the security and defense of Greenland,” and names the establishment of Trump’s “Golden Dome” missile defense system as a key goal.
So, to sum up: – The US secured a permanent military foothold that even an independent Greenland would inherit whether it likes it or not – The US now has veto power over any non-NATO military presence in Greenland, and over who can invest in its strategic infrastructure and resources (beyond NATO and the EU) – Denmark signed away its say over the principle of new US bases, with only the right to discuss the “implementation details” – Danish authorities no longer set the rules for US military movement across the island – And all of it is now justified by the defense of “the American continent”
I don’t know in which universe this even remotely “recognizes the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Kingdom and the Greenlandic people’s right to self-determination,” as Danish PM Mette Frederiksen put it (https://stm.dk/en/press/press-releases/expected-agreement-on-strengthened-security-in-the-arctic-and-the-north-atlantic-area). Yes, the preamble of the text cynically “reaffirms” Danish sovereignty but, in my book, when you let a foreign country put bases on your soil, move its troops without following your rules and veto who else can come in, in perpetuity, after it spent two years threatening to take you by force, the word for that is anything but “recognized sovereignty.”