“You can’t annex one other nation.” This was the clear message given by the Danish prime minister, Mette Frederiksen, at a recent press conference 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 one in every 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 below worldwide legislation however can not be taken without any consideration. US overseas coverage below Trump has grow to be a serious driver of this uncertainty, taking part in into the arms of Russian, and doubtlessly 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 america. Greenland, which is managed by Denmark, makes its personal home coverage selections. 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 resources. However its strategic location is arguably a good larger asset. Transport routes by way of the Arctic have grow to be extra reliable and for longer intervals of time through the yr 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 through the summer season.
Breaking the Ice: Arctic Development and Maritime Transportation, www.arcticportal.org
This has elevated alternatives for business transport. For instance, the gap for a container ship from Asia to Europe by way of the northeast passage could be up to three times shorter, in comparison with conventional routes by way of the Suez Canal or round Africa.
Equally, the northwest passage gives the shortest route between the east coast of america and Alaska. Add to that the seemingly substantial resources that the Arctic has, from oil and gas to minerals, and your complete area is starting to appear to be an enormous actual property deal within the making.
Arctic belongings
The financial promise of the Arctic, and significantly the area’s larger 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 by no means threatened anybody within the Arctic”, he was additionally fast to stress that Moscow was “enhancing the fight capabilities of the Armed Forces, and modernising navy infrastructure services” within the Arctic.
Equally worrying, Russia has increased 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.
National Snow & Ice Data Center, Arcticportal.org
In September 2024, China participated in Russia’s largest naval manoeuvres within the post-cold battle period, Ocean-2024, which had been carried out in north Pacific and Arctic waters. The next month, Russian and Chinese language coastguard vessels conducted their first joint patrol within the Arctic. Vance, subsequently, has some extent when he urges Greenland and Denmark to chop a take care of the US as a result of the “island isn’t secure”.
That the Russia-China partnership has resulted in an more and more navy presence within the Arctic has not gone unnoticed within the west. Worried concerning the safety of its Arctic territories, Canada has simply announced a C$6 billion (£3.2 billion) improve to services within the North American Aerospace Defense Command it operates collectively with america.
It is going to additionally purchase extra submarines, icebreakers and fighter jets to bolster its Arctic defences and invest an additional C$420 million (£228 million) right into a larger presence of its armed forces.
Learn extra:
Arctic breakdown: what climate change in the far north means for the rest of us
Svalbard’s future function?
Norway has equally boosted its defence presence within the Arctic, particularly in relation to the Svalbard archipelago (strategically positioned between the Norwegian mainland and the Arctic Circle). This has prompted an angry 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 grow to be host to Norwegian navy bases.
Beneath the treaty, Russia has a proper to a civilian presence there. The “fee on guaranteeing 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 japanese 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 site visitors alongside Russia’s northeast passage could be monitored. If, and when, a central Arctic shipping 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 essential due to its nearer proximity to the US. However Svalbard is essential to Nato for monitoring and countering Russian, and doubtlessly Chinese language, naval actions. This larger 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 – to date – that the US must have Svalbard in the identical method that Trump claims he wants Greenland to make sure US safety. Nor has Russia issued any particular threats to Svalbard. Nevertheless 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 noted “that Nato nations are more and more typically designating the Far North as a springboard for attainable 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 intention 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 robust message to Russia. It might additionally sign to the broader world that the US just isn’t about to provoke a territorial reordering of worldwide politics to swimsuit solely the pursuits of Moscow, Beijing and Washington.
