“You cannot annex another country.” This was the clear message given by the Danish prime minister, Mette Frederiksen, at a current press convention with the outgoing and incoming prime ministers of Greenland. It didn’t seem geared toward Russian president Vladimir Putin, however at Donald Trump, the president of certainly one of her nation’s closest allies, who has threatened to take over Greenland.
Frederiksen, talking in Greenland’s capitak Nuuk, was stating one thing that’s apparent beneath worldwide regulation however can now not be taken as a right. US overseas coverage beneath Trump has turn out to be a significant driver of this uncertainty, enjoying into the palms of Russian, and probably Chinese language, territorial ambitions.
The incoming Greenlandic prime minister, Jens-Frederik Nielsen, made it clear that it was for Greenlanders to find out their future, not the USA. Greenland, which is managed by Denmark, makes its personal home coverage choices. Polls recommend a majority of islanders need independence from Denmark sooner or later, however don’t need to be a part of the US.
Trump’s curiosity in Greenland is commonly related to the island’s huge, however largely untapped, mineral assets. However its strategic location is arguably an excellent better asset. Delivery routes by means of the Arctic have turn out to be extra reliable and for longer durations of time throughout the 12 months because of melting sea ice. The northwest passage (alongside the US and Canadian shorelines) and the northeast passage (alongside Russia’s Arctic coast) are sometimes ice free now throughout the summer time.
Breaking the Ice: Arctic Growth and Maritime Transportation, www.arcticportal.org
This has elevated alternatives for industrial transport. For instance, the gap for a container ship from Asia to Europe by means of the northeast passage may be as much as thrice shorter, in comparison with conventional routes by means of the Suez Canal or round Africa.
Equally, the northwest passage provides the shortest route between the east coast of the USA and Alaska. Add to that the doubtless substantial assets that the Arctic has, from oil and fuel to minerals, and your entire area is starting to seem like a large actual property deal within the making.
Arctic property
The financial promise of the Arctic, and significantly the area’s better accessibility, have additionally heightened navy and safety sensitivities.
The day earlier than J.D. Vance’s go to to Greenland on March 28, Vladimir Putin, gave a speech on the sixth worldwide Arctic discussion board in Murmansk in Russia’s excessive north, warning of elevated geopolitical rivalry.
Whereas he claimed that “Russia has never threatened anyone in the Arctic”, he was additionally fast to emphasize that Moscow was “enhancing the combat capabilities of the Armed Forces, and modernising military infrastructure facilities” within the Arctic.
Equally worrying, Russia has elevated its naval cooperation with China and given Beijing entry, and a stake, within the Arctic. In April 2024, the 2 nations’ navies signed a cooperation settlement on search and rescue missions on the excessive seas.
Nationwide Snow & Ice Knowledge Middle, Arcticportal.org
In September 2024, China participated in Russia’s largest naval manoeuvres within the post-cold conflict period, Ocean-2024, which have been performed in north Pacific and Arctic waters. The next month, Russian and Chinese language coastguard vessels performed their first joint patrol within the Arctic. Vance, due to this fact, has a degree when he urges Greenland and Denmark to chop a cope with the US as a result of the “island isn’t safe”.
That the Russia-China partnership has resulted in an more and more navy presence within the Arctic has not gone unnoticed within the west. Apprehensive concerning the safety of its Arctic territories, Canada has simply introduced a C$6 billion (£3.2 billion) improve to amenities within the North American Aerospace Protection Command it operates collectively with the USA.
It’s going to additionally purchase extra submarines, icebreakers and fighter jets to bolster its Arctic defences and make investments an extra C$420 million (£228 million) right into a better presence of its armed forces.
Svalbard’s future position?
Norway has equally boosted its defence presence within the Arctic, particularly in relation to the Svalbard archipelago (strategically situated between the Norwegian mainland and the Arctic Circle). This has prompted an indignant response from Russia, wrongly claiming that Oslo was in violation of the 1920 Svalbard Treaty which awarded the archipelago to Norway with the proviso that it should not turn out to be host to Norwegian navy bases.
Beneath the treaty, Russia has a proper to a civilian presence there. The “commission on ensuring Russia’s presence on the archipelago Spitzbergen”, the identify Moscow makes use of for Svalbard is chaired by Russian deputy prime minister Yury Trutnev, who can be Putin’s envoy to the far jap federal district. Trutnev has repeatedly complained about undue Norwegian restrictions on Russia’s presence in Svalbard.
From the Kremlin’s perspective, that is much less about Russia’s historic rights on Svalbard and extra about Norway’s – and Nato’s – presence in a strategic location on the nexus of the Greenland, Barents and Norwegian seas. From there, maritime visitors alongside Russia’s northeast passage may be monitored. If, and when, a central Arctic transport route turns into viable, which might move between Greenland and Svalbard, the strategic significance of the archipelago would enhance additional.
From Washington’s perspective, Greenland is extra necessary due to its nearer proximity to the US. However Svalbard is crucial to Nato for monitoring and countering Russian, and probably Chinese language, naval actions. This greater image tends to get misplaced in Trump’s White Home, which is extra involved with its personal fast neighbourhood and cares much less about regional safety management.
Consequently, there was no suggestion – up to now – that the US must have Svalbard in the identical means that Trump claims he wants Greenland to make sure US safety. Nor has Russia issued any particular threats to Svalbard. However it was noticeable that Putin in his speech on the Arctic discussion board mentioned historic territorial points, together with an obscure 1910 proposal for a land swap between the US, Denmark and Germany involving Greenland.
Putin additionally famous “that Nato countries are increasingly often designating the Far North as a springboard for possible conflicts”. It’s not troublesome to see Moscow’s logic: if the US can declare Greenland for safety causes, Russia ought to do the identical with Svalbard.
The conclusion to attract from this isn’t that Trump ought to purpose to annex a sovereign Norwegian island subsequent. Maritime geography within the north Atlantic underscores the significance of sustaining and strengthening long-established alliances.
Investing in expanded safety cooperation with Denmark and Norway as a part of Nato would safe US pursuits nearer to house and ship a powerful message to Russia. It might additionally sign to the broader world that the US shouldn’t be about to provoke a territorial reordering of world politics to swimsuit solely the pursuits of Moscow, Beijing and Washington.
