Trump could negotiate a North American Union Agreement with Canada and an independent Greenland while using diplomacy to negotiate a return of the Panama Canal ports to US control.
Canadian patriot here. My ancestors fled the USA at the time of the Tea Party for a reason. You invaded 3x. Last time we burned down the WH. I love Trump. A strong, courageous and honourable patriot with great vision and solid policies for America. But I have seen the authoritarian disaster of the EU experiment both economically and culturally. No to that. Far better to recreate our strong relationship (we were very close allies) and this is very possible with our new, real Conservative Party leadership in Pierre Poilievre. We want the same things: close the fking borders, open up oil/gas, cut govt and spending. And we want to rebuild our military to what it was in the glory days. MAGA! MCGA!
This article is a superbly reasoned analysis of Trump's statements on Greenland, Canada and Greenland. The Mockingbird media (yes, it is still under CIA control) has intentionally mischaracterized Trump's geopolitical vision -- an essential plan to block Chinese domination of the Arctic.
Thanks Chet! Yes, Trump wants Greenland to counter Russia and China in the Arctic though as we know there would be no reason to counter Russia on anything if he implemented our peace plan to end the war in a single week with a Russo-American Entente neutralizing the Sino-Russian military alliance!
You know that I agree -- and that I have agreed with your position on Russia and China for decades. It also seems to be hopeful that that the Premier of Greenland will understand and help his 56,000 Greenlanders to agree to Trump's defensive plan.
Do we need all of Greenland? If the Arctic portion is the strategically relevant portion, couldn't be just buy the northern half while still allowing/helping southern Greenland to be independent? The island is sparsely populated with most in the south. That might make a deal more palatable to Greenlanders who want to be independent rather than residents of an American territory. I would assume that any of Greenland that the US acquires would have territorial status?
That is an excellent idea that I would support. The US could annex North Greenland while guaranteeing the independence of a South Greenland Republic. If we annexed all of Greenland, making it a Commonwealth like Puerto Rico would make the most sense as it would give their citizens all the benefits of being part of the US while granting them maximum autonomy without having to pay federal taxes. However, if we just annexed the unpopulated part, then we would just make it a territory ruled from DC.
I agree a 50-50 US-Danish condominium would work well for Greenland but I don't think Denmark would accept that and I don't think Greenland's citizens would like that either. I agree that Canada could give Democrats more votes so annexation would likely not be the best option.
Danish defense minister Troels Lund Poulson admitted that Denmark had "neglected for many years to make the necessary investments in ships and in aircraft that will help monitor our kingdom, and that is what we are now trying to do something about."
economic dependency remains Greenland’s Achilles’ heel. Denmark’s annual subsidy of $600 million underpins key services - from health care to education - in a nation whose total GDP hovers around $2.4 billion. Without this financial lifeline, independence could become unsustainable unless new partnerships fill the gap.
Enter the United States. “If you want to have control over Greenland or have them closer to the US, it must be done by offering them more money than they currently get from Denmark in subsidies,” said Peter Viggo Jakobsen, a professor at the Center for War Studies at the University of Southern Denmark. "If Trump can offer the Greenlandic people a better deal, I can easily imagine that a majority of the population will declare independence."
"A 50/50 partnership could well be the solution to such under investment. Looks to be the most promising outcome"
That would be very easy to do. $600 million a year is a pittance. We could easily double or triple that subsidy if they declare independence and make us their sole security partner. I previously thought that a US-Danish condominium over Greenland might be the best solution but I think Greenland would much prefer independence backed by the US militarily.
Here some of my thoughts about America taking over Canada. How about this scenario?
Trump pulls out of European NATO but promises to maintain the American/Canadian pact, with American and Canadian military working together. Obviously America would dominate, and would propose to finance the installation of military bases and garrisons across the Artic.
Trump puts up and endorses a pro-America Canadian leadership candidate with substantial funding and the full resources of American political advisors and media manipulators. This candidate would propose closer economic ties with America to boost exports and jobs, reduce the costs of imports, attract inward investment and increase tourism.
Trump privately tells his oligarch friends he is going to tank the American economy, so they can cash in their American investments, short sell before the crash and watch as the markets collapse. Obviously the Canadian markets and share prices would collapse too.
Then the oligarchs buy everything back at 10cents on the dollar, taking control of all the key American business sectors - they now control the government, the military and all the key industries. They do the same in Canada, ending up with ownership of all the Canadian mining, energy, manufacturing, shipping and food production companies.
90% of Canadians live within a couple of hours of the American border, because that is where their income comes from, one way or another. If Trump imposes strict sanctions and a closed border, and a new pro-American candidate proposes a deal with closer ties, no sanctions and open borders, how many Canadians would reject it?
So de facto, America now controls Canada; its politics, its economy, its border policies, and its military.
Will the Canadians be allowed to keep their National Health Service free at the point of delivery? Maybe America could adopt something similar instead of bankrupting their citizens if they have a problematic pregnancy or a pre-existing condition.
Yes Canada could keep all of its own political, economic and health systems as they would retain veto authority over all the proposed NAU policies they disagreed with. The economic union idea is optional for Canada and I am guessing they would likely vote to opt out.
According to Visual Capitalist if Canada did become the 51st state they would be the healthiest and best educated, 4th richest overall, with the lowest crime rate and gun ownership but also quite low per capita incomes presumably because if you have a generous state sector you do not need such high wages.
Sensible on several levels except… all will be for nought, or worse, if the dominant European – in strict ethnic sense - character of the American Nation is not preserved.
Canadian patriot here. My ancestors fled the USA at the time of the Tea Party for a reason. You invaded 3x. Last time we burned down the WH. I love Trump. A strong, courageous and honourable patriot with great vision and solid policies for America. But I have seen the authoritarian disaster of the EU experiment both economically and culturally. No to that. Far better to recreate our strong relationship (we were very close allies) and this is very possible with our new, real Conservative Party leadership in Pierre Poilievre. We want the same things: close the fking borders, open up oil/gas, cut govt and spending. And we want to rebuild our military to what it was in the glory days. MAGA! MCGA!
This article is a superbly reasoned analysis of Trump's statements on Greenland, Canada and Greenland. The Mockingbird media (yes, it is still under CIA control) has intentionally mischaracterized Trump's geopolitical vision -- an essential plan to block Chinese domination of the Arctic.
Thanks Chet! Yes, Trump wants Greenland to counter Russia and China in the Arctic though as we know there would be no reason to counter Russia on anything if he implemented our peace plan to end the war in a single week with a Russo-American Entente neutralizing the Sino-Russian military alliance!
You know that I agree -- and that I have agreed with your position on Russia and China for decades. It also seems to be hopeful that that the Premier of Greenland will understand and help his 56,000 Greenlanders to agree to Trump's defensive plan.
Do we need all of Greenland? If the Arctic portion is the strategically relevant portion, couldn't be just buy the northern half while still allowing/helping southern Greenland to be independent? The island is sparsely populated with most in the south. That might make a deal more palatable to Greenlanders who want to be independent rather than residents of an American territory. I would assume that any of Greenland that the US acquires would have territorial status?
That is an excellent idea that I would support. The US could annex North Greenland while guaranteeing the independence of a South Greenland Republic. If we annexed all of Greenland, making it a Commonwealth like Puerto Rico would make the most sense as it would give their citizens all the benefits of being part of the US while granting them maximum autonomy without having to pay federal taxes. However, if we just annexed the unpopulated part, then we would just make it a territory ruled from DC.
Greenland is easily solved - it's defence is costly for Denmark.
Some 50/50 JV of some sort has significant merit.
Canada.
A population of similar size to California - California with its 54 Electoral College votes.
Why anyone would want to annex Canada, make it the 51st state beggars belief.
54 electoral college votes for the Democrats in perpetuity.
For Canada is very much of the Left.
Panama Canal.
Control of this needs to be in the hands of a nation that polices the Worlds seas to ensure freedom of transit for ALL.
Communist China, no thanks.
I agree a 50-50 US-Danish condominium would work well for Greenland but I don't think Denmark would accept that and I don't think Greenland's citizens would like that either. I agree that Canada could give Democrats more votes so annexation would likely not be the best option.
Greenland 'Ready To Talk' With Trump As 'Status Quo No Longer An Option'
https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/greenland-ready-talk-trump-status-quo-no-longer-option?
Danish defense minister Troels Lund Poulson admitted that Denmark had "neglected for many years to make the necessary investments in ships and in aircraft that will help monitor our kingdom, and that is what we are now trying to do something about."
economic dependency remains Greenland’s Achilles’ heel. Denmark’s annual subsidy of $600 million underpins key services - from health care to education - in a nation whose total GDP hovers around $2.4 billion. Without this financial lifeline, independence could become unsustainable unless new partnerships fill the gap.
Enter the United States. “If you want to have control over Greenland or have them closer to the US, it must be done by offering them more money than they currently get from Denmark in subsidies,” said Peter Viggo Jakobsen, a professor at the Center for War Studies at the University of Southern Denmark. "If Trump can offer the Greenlandic people a better deal, I can easily imagine that a majority of the population will declare independence."
"A 50/50 partnership could well be the solution to such under investment. Looks to be the most promising outcome"
That would be very easy to do. $600 million a year is a pittance. We could easily double or triple that subsidy if they declare independence and make us their sole security partner. I previously thought that a US-Danish condominium over Greenland might be the best solution but I think Greenland would much prefer independence backed by the US militarily.
Yep $1.2bn is a pittance to pay - can just print it! Or get it from somewhere else in the budget as it is merely a rounding error.
Concur vis "Greenland independence backed by US military"
Can be sold better to all parties concerned.
Greenland gets its Independence.
Denmark no longer has to subsidise.
Other nations fears somewhat assuaged by the Independence route rather than "Closer political alignment" with US.
One presumes though that backed by military comes with the "necessity" for a military base. Might ruffle a few feathers.
I note that Trump/Musk and Co are apparently looking for $5.6trillion odd in saves over the next 10 years. Doable imo as that's only $560bn a year.
We certainly live in interesting times with all that is going on in the world.
David, just in case I wrote an article about the reaffirmation of Monroe Doctrine by Trump too: https://thegeopoliticalnavigator.substack.com/p/make-monroe-doctrine-great-again
Here some of my thoughts about America taking over Canada. How about this scenario?
Trump pulls out of European NATO but promises to maintain the American/Canadian pact, with American and Canadian military working together. Obviously America would dominate, and would propose to finance the installation of military bases and garrisons across the Artic.
Trump puts up and endorses a pro-America Canadian leadership candidate with substantial funding and the full resources of American political advisors and media manipulators. This candidate would propose closer economic ties with America to boost exports and jobs, reduce the costs of imports, attract inward investment and increase tourism.
Trump privately tells his oligarch friends he is going to tank the American economy, so they can cash in their American investments, short sell before the crash and watch as the markets collapse. Obviously the Canadian markets and share prices would collapse too.
Then the oligarchs buy everything back at 10cents on the dollar, taking control of all the key American business sectors - they now control the government, the military and all the key industries. They do the same in Canada, ending up with ownership of all the Canadian mining, energy, manufacturing, shipping and food production companies.
90% of Canadians live within a couple of hours of the American border, because that is where their income comes from, one way or another. If Trump imposes strict sanctions and a closed border, and a new pro-American candidate proposes a deal with closer ties, no sanctions and open borders, how many Canadians would reject it?
So de facto, America now controls Canada; its politics, its economy, its border policies, and its military.
What did I miss?
Will the Canadians be allowed to keep their National Health Service free at the point of delivery? Maybe America could adopt something similar instead of bankrupting their citizens if they have a problematic pregnancy or a pre-existing condition.
Yes Canada could keep all of its own political, economic and health systems as they would retain veto authority over all the proposed NAU policies they disagreed with. The economic union idea is optional for Canada and I am guessing they would likely vote to opt out.
According to Visual Capitalist if Canada did become the 51st state they would be the healthiest and best educated, 4th richest overall, with the lowest crime rate and gun ownership but also quite low per capita incomes presumably because if you have a generous state sector you do not need such high wages.
Sensible on several levels except… all will be for nought, or worse, if the dominant European – in strict ethnic sense - character of the American Nation is not preserved.
Trump is the Deep State. Promoting the New World Order. He has every attribute of the antichrist. Why can't people see this?? It is SO obvious.