Only the bravado of the “art of the deal” could turn a wise purchase into a playground. Lately, the rhetoric coming out of the White House feels less like Thomas Jefferson and more like a high school bully stealing his lunch money. However, America should open its wallet and take Greenland.
White House aide Stephen Miller recently told reporters that no country would fight the United States militarily over the future of Greenland, essentially shrugging off the sovereignty of NATO ally Denmark. Pres. Trump, meanwhile, doubled down, claiming the island was “crawling” with Russian and Chinese ships and suggesting there was an “easy way” to resolve the ownership issue.
But flexing our military power over a territory of 56,000 people and a NATO partner is not a show of strength. He’s a grown man who proudly threatens a kindergarten class. The language is embarrassing, counterproductive, and ignores the fact that America has been trying to politely buy this piece of “real estate” for over 150 years.
America’s Long Interest in Greenland
Our interest in Greenland is not a modern MAGA fever dream. It began in 1867, when Secretary of State William Seward—the man who bought Alaska—commissioned a report on Greenland’s vast mineral and fish resources. Seward saw the island as a strategic bookend to the North American continent.
In 1910, the US even considered a territorial exchange, offering Denmark parts of the Philippines in exchange for Greenland and the Danish West Indies. In the end, we settled for just the islands, which became the US Virgin Islands in 1917.
Opinion: Repeal of these laws may improve access to healthcare in TN
After World War II, the Truman administration realized Greenland’s value during the Cold War. In 1946, Secretary of State James Byrnes made an official offer of $100 million in gold to the Danish foreign minister. Denmark said no then, just as they say no now, but the geopolitical logic remains sound.
Why the hell do we want a giant rock covered in ice? Because it’s not just a rock; it is also a fortress and a gold mine.
Greenland investment value
From a national security perspective, Greenland is the highest level. It is home to Pituffik Space Base (formerly Thule), which is the backbone of our early warning missile defense system. It is also right in the GIUK Gap – the naval choke point between Greenland, Iceland and the UK through which Russian submarines must pass to enter the Atlantic. As Arctic ice melts and new sea lanes open, control of the “Northwest Passage” becomes a matter of economic and military survival.
Then there are the minerals. Greenland sits on some of the world’s largest deposits of rare earth elements, which are essential for everything from America’s advanced fighter jets to the smartphone in your pocket. China currently controls the vast majority of the supply chain for these minerals. Owning Greenland would not just be a land grab; it would be a massive step toward American technological independence.
Opinion: Martin Luther King, Jr. teaches the “moral imperative” to combat homelessness
I’m as vocal as anyone about the national debt fast approaching $40 trillion. The idea of the US spending hundreds of billions – potentially more than Denmark’s entire $400 billion GDP – to acquire the island seems preposterous at first glance. But this is a serious investment, not an expense.
Some estimates put the value of Greenland’s untapped mineral and energy assets at $4.4 trillion, but much of it is extremely difficult to mine. Even if we extract only a fraction of this, the return on investment would exceed the original purchase price. It is, quite literally, the Louisiana Purchase of the 21st century.
The problem is not the goal; is the delivery.
A better approach to negotiation
Miller’s “iron laws of power” rhetoric makes us look like a 19th century imperialist relic. We must not threaten Denmark; we must convince them—and the people of Greenland—that their future is brighter and more prosperous under the American flag.
Greenland currently relies on a massive annual subsidy from Copenhagen to keep its economy afloat. We should be talking about prosperity, infrastructure and a seat at the table of the world’s largest economy. It wouldn’t hurt to compliment their robust halibut fishing in the process. We should also make an offer so lucrative that Danish taxpayers, tired of subsidizing a remote island, ask their government to pick up the cheque.
Stop the tough rhetoric. Leave aside the military threats. If we want Greenland, we should stop acting like bullies and start rolling out the welcome mat.
Sometimes the most powerful thing a nation can do is not to rattle a sword, but to let the money do the talking.
Cameron Smith, columnist for The Tennessean and USA TODAY Network Tennessee
USA TODAY Network columnist Cameron Smith is a Memphis-born, Brentwood-raised political attorney who is raising four boys in Nolensville, Tenn., with his exceptionally patient wife, Justine. Direct outrage or agreement to smith.david.cameron@gmail.com or @DCameronSmith on Twitter. Agree or disagree? Send a letter to the editor at letters@tennessean.com
This article originally appeared on the Nashville Tennessean: Trump should go after Greenland, but change his approach | Opinion