"What's at stake is not only Greenland's sovereignty, but also trust. Alliances rest on predictability and on the expectation that power, especially allied power, remains bound by law. If international law can be set aside when it becomes inconvenient, trust is gone. If strategic calculations lead to a disregard for sovereignty in Greenland, how will Europe continue to believe in U.S. commitments elsewhere?"
"We are witnessing the return of an old strategic reflex: a Cold War mind-set in which geography is treated as destiny and influence as zero-sum, and independence is seen as a strategic risk rather than a democratic choice, wrote Berset. He continued: The fear is that an independent Greenland might one day drift toward Russia's or China's orbit, placing their weapons at America's doorstep. It would be an Arctic repeat of the Bay of Pigs."
President Trump's threats to acquire Greenland threaten Greenland's sovereignty, international law, and allied trust. Allowing international law to be set aside when inconvenient would destroy the predictability on which alliances rest. The approach reflects a Cold War mind-set that treats geography as destiny, frames influence as zero-sum and labels independence as a strategic risk rather than a democratic choice. There is concern that an independent Greenland could drift toward Russia or China, placing their weapons at America's doorstep and repeating past confrontations. If strategic calculations permit disregard for Greenland's sovereignty, European belief in U.S. commitments elsewhere could erode, and tariffs have been threatened to force support.
Read at www.mediaite.com
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]