Only the bravado of the “art of the deal” can turn a smart acquisition into a playground shake-up. Lately, White House rhetoric has sounded less like Thomas Jefferson and more like a high school bully stealing lunch money. Still, the United States should open its wallet and get Greenland.
White House aide Stephen Miller recently told reporters that no country would engage in military confrontation with the United States over Greenland’s future, essentially dismissing the sovereignty of NATO ally Denmark. news. Meanwhile, Trump doubled down, claiming the island was “crawling” Russian and Chinese ships and suggesting there was an “easy way” to resolve the ownership issue.
But displaying our military might in a territory of 56,000 people and the territory of our NATO partners is not a show of strength. This is a grown man proudly threatening a kindergarten class. This language is embarrassing, counterproductive, and ignores the fact that America has been trying to politely purchase this particular piece of “real estate” for over 150 years.
America’s long-term interest in Greenland
Our interest in Greenland is not a modern MAGA fever dream. It began in 1867, when Secretary of State William Seward, who purchased Alaska, commissioned a report on Greenland’s rich mineral and fish resources. Seward viewed the island as a strategic bookend to the North American continent.
In 1910, the United States even considered a territorial exchange, handing part of the Philippines to Denmark in exchange for Greenland and the Danish West Indies. We ultimately settled on these islands, which were renamed the U.S. Virgin Islands in 1917.
Viewpoint: Repealing these laws could improve health care access in Tennessee
After World War II, the Truman Administration realized Greenland’s value in the coming Cold War. In 1946, Secretary of State James Burns formally offered $100 million worth of gold to the Danish Foreign Minister. Denmark refused then, as they refuse now, but the geopolitical logic remains sound.
Why on earth would we want a giant ice-covered rock? Because it’s not just a stone; It was both a fortress and a gold mine.
Greenland investment value
From a national security perspective, Greenland is the ultimate high ground. It is home to the Pitufik Space Base (formerly Thule), which is the backbone of our early warning missile defense system. It also happens to be located at the GIUK Gap, a naval chokepoint between Greenland, Iceland and the UK, through which Russian submarines must pass to enter the Atlantic Ocean. As Arctic ice melts and new shipping lanes open, controlling the Northwest Passage becomes a matter of economic and military survival.
Then there are minerals. Greenland has the world’s largest deposits of rare earth elements that are vital to everything from advanced U.S. fighter jets to the smartphones in your pocket. Currently, China controls the vast majority of supply chains for these minerals. Owning Greenland is more than just a land grab; This would be a major step toward technological independence for the United States.
Viewpoint: Martin Luther King teaches ‘moral responsibility’ to fight homelessness
I’m as hawkish as anyone on the national debt, which is rapidly approaching $40 trillion. The idea that the United States would spend hundreds of billions of dollars—perhaps more than Denmark’s GDP of $400 billion—to acquire the island may seem foolhardy at first glance. But this is a serious investment, not an expense.
Greenland’s untapped mineral and energy assets are estimated to be worth $4.4 trillion, but much of them are extremely difficult to extract. Even if we withdraw only a small percentage of that, the ROI will dwarf the original purchase price. It is no exaggeration to say that this is the Louisiana Purchase of the 21st century.
The problem is not the goal; This is delivery.
A better way to negotiate
Miller’s “iron law of power” rhetoric makes us look like a relic of 19th-century imperialism. We do not need to threaten Denmark; we do not need to threaten Denmark. We need to convince them—and the people of Greenland—that their future is brighter and more prosperous under the American flag.
Greenland currently relies on huge annual subsidies from Copenhagen to keep its economy afloat. We should be talking about prosperity, infrastructure and a seat at the table in the world’s largest economy. It also doesn’t hurt to praise their strong halibut fishery in the process. We should also make a lucrative offer so that Danish taxpayers, tired of subsidizing a distant island, demand their government accept a check.
Stop the tough guy talk. Eliminate 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 country can do is not to wield a sword, but to let money do the talking.
Cameron Smith, Tennessee columnist for The Tennessean and USA TODAY Network
USA TODAY Network Tennessee columnist Cameron Smith is a recovering political attorney who was born in Memphis and raised in Brentwood, raising four boys in Nolensville, Tennessee, with his especially patient wife, Justine. Express outrage or agreement directly at smith.david.cameron@gmail.com or @DCameronSmith on Twitter. Agree or disagree? Send a letter to the editor to letter@tennessean.com
This article originally appeared in The Nashville Tennessean: Trump should pursue Greenland, but change his approach | Opinion