So he said it again! This time, in his formal speech to a joint sitting of the
US Congress and Senate on Tuesday, US President Trump said `we
need’ Greenland for national and even international security, and `one
way or other, we are going to get Greenland.’
Since even before he took the oath of office, Trump has explicitly stated
that he intends to take over the Panama Canal, and Greenland—and
annex Canada too while he’s about it. Clearly, he’s serious. He started a
trade war with Canada this week.
He evidently intends to dominate the western hemisphere, further
integrate the economies of at least north America’s three big countries,
and exploit the vast untapped expanse of Greenland and northern
Canada.
It doesn’t seem likely as of now, but putative US annexation of
Greenland and Canada would give the US control over more than a third
of the Arctic Ocean, just as global warming and the weakening polar
vortex could open the Arctic up for global shipping, mining, and other
commercial activities—not to speak of the possibility of populating the
vast northern expanses.
Sure, Trump is publicly dismissive about global warming, but it is
possible that some advisors—for this sounds like a Think tank
scheme—may have taken climate data into account, or at least be
planning for worst case scenarios.
Four oceans and a double-continent
That Trump compares himself to Washington and Lincoln, and speaks of
ushering in `a golden age,’ indicates that he has a world-changing plan
on his anvil. Judging from what he has said, Trump’s grand vision is the
Monroe Doctrine on steroids: he aims to control the Americas and four
surrounding oceans.
If this analysis is right, Trump’s tariffs on Canada and Mexico are not
actually about insularity, or even revenue, but meant to leverage the
US’s economic strength to force other countries to sue for relief—which
could be his path to closer integration, if not some sort of annexation.
His talk of taking over the Panama Canal indicates that the scope of US
domination he has in mind includes Central America and the Caribbean,
if not also a part or all of South America.
The US Navy already dominates the Pacific, which is almost half the
globe. And his references to `a big, beautiful ocean between us’
indicates that he sees the Atlantic as America’s moat. It is not for
nothing that he has renamed the Gulf of Mexico as the Gulf of America.
Trump’s cordiality towards UK Prime Minister Starmer just a day before
he scolded Ukraine’s President Zelenskyy might indicate that he wants
to keep the close US-UK relationship going, weaning the UK further
away from the European continent. Geographically, that would help to
bring the Atlantic into the putative US sphere of influence.
No doubt he would then want to bring in Australia and New Zealand too,
to tie up the southwest Pacific—and, if the propaganda of his friends can
reverse South Africa’s history, the Southern Ocean and Antarctica too.
Japan and South Korea could possibly help to secure the northeastern
Pacific rim.
Russian compact
If the potential of the Arctic is indeed in Trump’s mind, and he wants the
US to control at least a third of it, Russia would still control another
half—for, it stretches right across the north of Asia and half of Europe.
So, he would have to accommodate Russia, at least for the time being.
No wonder he has stopped defending Ukraine.
This accommodation would be logical under the rubric of Russia’s `multi-
polar world’ mantra, which Secretary of State Marco Rubio has adopted.
On the other hand, China—undoubtedly another major pole—might be
unwilling for the US and Russia to more or less surround the Arctic.
There could be Sino-Russian friction over parts of Siberia, which China
believes were once Chinese territory, and should be again.
China could also seek a pact with one or more of the Scandinavian
countries, to get access to the Arctic, not to speak of their oil, mineral,
timber, and marine wealth.
A US takeover of Greenland would in any case bring the focus to
Scandinavia, for Denmark currently has control of Greenland. And Finns
remember that Russia took charge of Finland during the 19th century.
China might then use the opportunity to get a Scandinavian foothold on
the Arctic, possibly offering security in exchange for naval bases.
Finland and Sweden only signed up for NATO membership after Russia
invaded Ukraine three years ago, after decades of pacifist neutrality. So,
they must be more aghast than others at the US simply dropping out
after having been the cornerstone of Europe’s security architecture for
80 years, and could be eager for alternative security options.
For his part, Trump doesn’t want to waste money (as he sees it) on
protecting the Continent. Ever since his first term began in 2017, he has
said that Europeans need to pay what he considers their fair share for
NATO, and that he thinks the US should drop out of NATO.
The fact is that many European economies have been reduced to little
more than providers of tourism services to Americans and others. Plus,
the sanctions imposed on Russia over its invasion of Ukraine seem to
have hurt Europe more than Russia.
BRI could be reinvigorated
China’s Belt and Road Initiative has been on the back burner since
Covid but, in light of Trump’s dismissive attitude, some European
countries might now be happy to accept Chinese development plans.
That could also bring security guarantees, especially if the US withdraws
from NATO.
If railway, pipeline, and road infrastructure is to connect China to
Europe, some of these would probably pass through Russia. Central
Asia and Iran too could be routes.
China already has huge investments (and goodwill) in Africa. So, if it
steps in as Europe’s chief investor, and possibly its security guarantor, a
more integrated Eurasian-African supercontinent would be a vast
storehouse of resources, an economic powerhouse, and a territorial-
demographic mammoth.
All this could strengthen alliances across Asia, Africa and Europe in a
way that would restrict the reach of the US, and increase Russia’s
salience. However, pretty much at the connecting point of those three
continents, Israel could be an Achilles’ heel for Russia and China.
Especially if the UK remains in the US orbit, Israel would too.
Most of the Arabian peninsula too is controlled by the US-UK-Israel
Deep State. In such a putative scenario, a huge question mark would
hang over the role of this strategic centre of the potential Eurasian-
African behemoth. In this context, Trump announcing in the presence of
Prime Minister Netanyahu that the US would own Gaza is intriguing.
However, the role and the fate of West Asia is still an academic
question. For, although such an expansive alliance is the purpose of
President Xi’s plan for the world, it is nowhere near a reality. Nor, for that
matter, is Trump’s putative vision. All one can say for the moment is that
progress on one could boost the other.
