jack [he/him, comrade/them]

  • 334 Posts
  • 5.22K Comments
Joined 5 years ago
cake
Cake day: July 26th, 2020

help-circle








  • None of this answers the issue that the US already has all of this whether they formally own Greenland or not.

    In order to exercise control over those resources, they need to build an enormous amount of infrastructure that necessarily tramples Greenlandic autonomy. There is no existing legal mechanism for that without the consent of Greenlanders. Seizing the island through military or other means is how they do that.

    I’m of the opinion that they don’t want any of this, but instead they want to break a norm of the modern world and re-establish a new precedent for the sale of the 50,000 human beings that live there within western culture. This then sets them up for breaking other norms.

    You think they need to establish a precedent of norm-breaking to justify future norm-breaking, but if they “already have all of that” as you said above, why do they need to break the norms at all?


  • Greenland on the chessboard of US imperialism

    Why is the Trump Administration seeking the direct annexation of Greenland, when the US empire already holds extensive rights over the island?

    spoiler

    The colonial era formally ended in 1953, but political equality with Denmark did not follow. Following a referendum, so-called home rule was introduced in 1979, which was replaced in June 2009 by the current status of self-government. Under self-government, Greenlanders hold the rights to the island’s subsoil and the minerals found there. However, foreign and security policies remain decided in Denmark, which is why Greenland is considered NATO territory.

    Greenland is not a member of the European Union. In a 1982 referendum, 53% of the Greenlandic people voted to leave the European Economic Community, now the EU. Today, Greenland is classified as one of the EU’s Overseas Countries and Territories.

    In 1951, a secret agreement between the US government and Denmark’s envoy to the United States granted US military involvement in Greenland. The agreement was highly controversial and in detriment to official Danish policies at the time. Nevertheless, it remains in force today and has been repeatedly confirmed. In practice, it grants unlimited US military rights over Greenland.

    Thus, for decades, the US has maintained several military facilities in Greenland. The history of these facilities includes forced evictions of Inuit families in 1953, the crash of an American B-52 plane carrying four atomic bombs in 1968, and other harms inflicted on the local population.

    The Danish government repeatedly states that Greenland belongs to the Greenlanders and is not for sale. But in reality, Denmark has been selling off Greenland to the US for decades. “We already have a defense agreement between the Kingdom and the United States today, which gives the United States wide access to Greenland,” the Danish Prime Minister stated in an official statement earlier this week.

    This raises the question: Why does the Trump Administration seek an annexation of Greenland, when the US empire already holds extensive rights over Greenland? The answer lies in a new security strategy and the demand for unquestioned and unlimited control over oil, control over minerals, and military dominance.

    Greenland possesses at least 25 of the 34 minerals designated as “critical raw materials” by the European Commission. Greenland has significant deposits of rare earths, copper, nickel, zinc, gold, diamonds, iron ore, titanium, tungsten and uranium. Trump wants US companies, many of which have invested heavily in his re-election, to have unfettered access to Greenland’s mineral deposit resources.

    Moreover, Greenland’s geographic position near the Arctic is important. Control over northern sea routes, such as the Northeast Passage, is becoming increasingly important as climate change advances. A fully controlled, militarized and rearmed Greenland is also intended to serve as an advanced base against both Russia and China. Beyond the prospect of super-profits, keeping socialist China far away from Greenland is a strategic goal for both the US and Denmark.