Europe has two viable ways to defend Greenland from Trump

US President Donald Trump announces that he intends to take control of Greenland; Europe has two real ways to defend it, but the Europeans' best chance is that taking the island would require long-term, complicated preparations and procedures, and the US president likes “easy victories,” says the Economist.

The British weekly writes at the beginning that Europeans could consider up to three options for defending Greenland, of which: first it would be to argue that the reasons given by the president explaining the need to appropriate it are unjustified.

The island is not threatened by Russia and China – contrary to what Trump claims – and current agreements allow the US to increase its military presence in Greenland as desired. Moreover, it is under the NATO umbrella. This neutralizes the president's argument that the island is necessary for America's security.

WITH second hand, Trump's thesis that the US needs Greenlandic raw materials is untenable; extracting them would be so expensive as to be virtually unprofitable, and American companies that could enter into contracts for their exploitation are somehow not willing to do so.

The problem is that these arguments do not convince the president, the weekly emphasizes.

The former American diplomat explains that the will to take over Greenland is primarily dictated by (Trump's) “obsession with his historical legacy,” reports the Economist.

Two options for Europeans

In this situation – the weekly concludes – Europe actually has two options. The first is deterrence. Jeremy Shapiro, an expert of the European Council on Foreign Relations think tank, believes that this should involve taking steps that will influence the “profitability” of the decision to try to seize the island. These would include, for example, the rotating presence of European troops in Greenland, the threat of sanctions to American companies and lobbying with friendly Republicans.

However, there is a problem related to Ukraine; If the Europeans' behavior irritates the Trump administration, there is a risk that it will withdraw its initial promises to provide security guarantees to Kiev, notes the Economist.

Europe is therefore left with the last option: hope that something will distract Trump and the president will lose patience with dealing with Greenland – suggests the weekly.

Any form of taking over the island considered by the administration would require careful, long planning and then patient implementation. “These are not the president's strengths,” says the Economist.

He has a lot on his mind now, from Venezuela to Iran, he also faces midterm elections, and only 4 percent. Americans support the takeover of Greenland by force. Trump, on the other hand, values ​​”easy victories” the most, the weekly concludes.

A week earlier, the Economist warned that the scenario that Trump intends to take control of Greenland should be seriously taken into account. He also explained that the US administration was considering various variants of such an appropriation: the first would involve strengthening the independence movement on the island and fueling resentment towards Denmark; the second – by offering the Greenlandic authorities an agreement while completely bypassing the Danish government; there is also Trump's repeated threat to use force.

The weekly reported that the CIA and the National Security Agency (NSA) were to step up intelligence operations regarding the Greenlandic independence movement and were tasked with identifying residents of the island “sympathetic to America.” (PAP)

fit/rtt/