The problem, it seems, is that we have no problems of our own. Or we cannot see them because one cannot see beyond six feet in Delhi. Or we keep trying to brush them under the Persian carpet, where, of course, they have their own problems.
So in Delhi’s drawing rooms, the focus shifts far afield to a virginal Greenland cowering under Trump’s covetous gaze. At one level, I regard that, too, as my problem. Greenland has been on my bucket list—a list that moves as slowly as an old Soviet queue—ever since my first sight from a transatlantic flight of endless vistas of pristine ice, dotted along the coast with brightly coloured cottage-like houses. Now Greenland is less likely to be ticked off that list even as the time to k. the b. comes ever nearer: getting a Schengen visa, though not easy, is a relatively civilised process; with another kind of ICE in full flow, an American visa will require jumping through hoops, including swearing declarations that one is not going to the US to engage in money-laundering, terrorism, prostitution and so on.
But despite three wonderfully voluble dinners since New Year’s Day, nobody—not even Donald Trump—can quite predict what will happen with Greenland. The world—particularly Europe—waits like an anxious teenaged girl, plucking petals off a daisy flower and wondering: Will he, won’t he.
American interest in Greenland has been voiced before: in 1867 when the US acquired Alaska from Russia, in 1946, in 2019 under Trump 1.0 and even last January (which seems an awfully long time ago).Its strategic and commercial importance is undeniable. Arctic warming is opening up the Northern Sea Route and Northwest Passage, drastically cutting transit times. Russia has a powerful Arctic fleet and claims a long Arctic coastline. China is investing heavily in ports, energy and mining with an eye on Greenland’s 1,000 trillion cubic feet of gas, 90 billion barrels of oil and massive deposits of precious metals and critical minerals.
All these are rational strategic interests whose pursuit does not require a territorial takeover and a strangling of NATO. The US occupied Greenland during World War II following the German occupation of Denmark. A 1951 agreement gives the US virtually complete military access to the territory; Denmark/Greenland are hardly likely to object to greater US military presence now: it is the US that has reduced its earlier 10,000 strong presence to 200 personnel confined to one base.
But in a Trumpian world, rational methods are passe’. Explanations have to be found in irrational impulses and psychological vulnerabilities.
First, Trump, the real estate mogul, likes ownership not tenancy. And he likes big: Ask the 6’3” tall, broad, chunky Maduro. (In Manhattan, the XXL Nike tracksuits worn by Maduro after arrest are flying off the shelves.) So Trump salivates over Greenland on a map, which looks misleadingly the size of Africa on the Mercator projection, and says (as reported in The New Yorker): “Look at the size of this, it is massive, and that should be part of the United States.” By that logic, what about Russia?
Next, Trump, the reality TV host, enjoys playing commander-in-chief. Stopping wars, bombing countries—the tally is seven in one year, “running” places and then watching it, from the safety of the White House situation room, like “a television show…the speed, the violence”. This military porn can be addictive. And, as he recently claimed, no one can stop him except his “own morality… own mind”. Well, so this week the needle is tilting towards He will. Unless Cuba, Mexico, Columbia, Iran… come in the way.
The author was India’s high commissioner to the UK and ambassador to the United States.