The Greenland Gambit

I’m torn on whether it makes sense at all to respond to Trump’s proposals as if they’re serious, but if you’re looking for a policy-oriented dive on the stupidity of schemes to annex Greenland, you could do worse:

The United States would gain nothing but additional expenses and unnecessary tensions with one of its close allies by pursuing free association with Greenland. In fact, free association would spoil what is a near-perfect arrangement for the United States, as Washington is already achieving its geostrategic objectives, while letting Denmark foot the bill for running Greenlandic society. Abandoning the cheap and successful engagement strategy would be an unforced error that would only benefit America’s adversaries.

Instead, the United States should maintain its current efforts and strive to find cheap ways to further strengthen its ties with Greenland. The United States could invest in additional support packages aimed at cooperation with Greenland in areas such as tourism and education. To make it easier for U.S. mining companies seeking to work in Greenland, Washington could incentivize new ventures by creating favorable loan schemes or a special investment fund for Arctic mining. This would not only secure important mineral supplies, but it would also weave the Greenlandic and U.S. economies closer together. Finally, Greenland has suggested the establishment of an Arctic North American political forum. Washington should support this initiative. Such a forum could be a place where the Arctic countries and local governments in North America (such as Alaska and Nunavut), as well as organizations representing local and indigenous communities, could strengthen dialogue and cooperation.

The MAGA hangers-on are flocking to this, likely as a way of announcing their loyalty by supporting the most hare-brained schemes imaginable. It’s gonna be a long, stupid four years.