Donald Trump gave a speech to the World Economic Forum (WEF) in Davos, Switzerland, on Wednesday, amid maneuvering by European allies to forestall a confrontation with the U.S. over Trump's desire to acquire the island.
Trump promised that he would not use military force to seize the island from Denmark, but he demanded that negotiations be opened "immediately" for the U.S. to acquire Greenland.
"I don't want to use force. I won't use force. All the United States is asking for is a place called Greenland," he told world leaders.
"It's the United States alone that can protect this giant piece of land, this giant piece of ice, develop it and improve it," Trump said. He reminded delegates that the U.S. was a "great power" and argued that Denmark simply wasn't.
He previously mocked Denmark for "losing" Greenland in "six hours" during World War II. In fact, Germany never invaded Greenland. They established some weather stations on the Eastern part of the island. Denmark's King Christian X surrendered in the face of the overwhelming German military advantage and sought to spare his people the fate of Warsaw and other cities that were leveled by the Nazis.
Trump used his speech to mock, insult, and belittle Europe. He claimed, "Certain places in Europe are not even recognizable anymore. And we can argue about it, but there's no argument," Trump said, referring to "the largest wave of mass migration in human history." Not really. The partition of India and Pakistan led to about 18 million people being displaced. By contrast, Europe saw about 2 million people moving from Africa and the Middle East to Northern and Central Europe.
The tone of Trump's speech was combative. If the Europeans wanted to make a deal with Trump to keep the U.S. out of Greenland, Trump made sure they knew that was out of the question.
The Europeans are casting about, looking for a way to "save" NATO. It appears that only if Europe acquiesces to Trump's Greenland takeover will the president keep America in the alliance.
Meanwhile at Davos and Brussels, diplomats and politicians discuss Plan B — the defense of Europe without America. Thanks in part to Mr. Trump, they have a one-year head start. After Mr. Trump cut off almost all military aid to Ukraine last year, European nations stepped up to the challenge, replacing America as Ukraine’s main backer.
By browbeating European nations to pay more for their own defense, Mr. Trump helped to spark a surge in European arms production. Last week, President Emmanuel Macron claimed that France is supplying two-thirds of the satellite intelligence used by Ukraine to combat Russia. In a speech to the French military, he said: “Where Ukraine was extremely dependent on American intelligence capacity,” a year ago, “two-thirds is today provided by France.”
That's very nice, Monsieur Macron, but what will France do to help Ukraine drive the Russian invaders out of Ukraine? She's not even an official part of NATO. I'm sure Macron and his friends in NATO will be standing on the sidelines, cheering while Ukraine pours more young men into the Donbas meat grinder.
NATO died three decades ago when Soviet communism collapsed in a heap. It was one of the most impactful moments of the 20th century, and it was thanks to America that it happened. There were other considerations that kept the alliance alive for another 30 years.
NATO was a moneymaker for Europe. As long as the alliance existed, European voters were convinced to keep their defense industries in business. Otherwise, the European public didn't see the need for a defense industry, just as long as America was there to fight their battles for them. They never imagined an American president like Trump who would actually demand that they pull their weight in NATO or that the U.S would leave.
Matt Taibbi nails NATO's recent history: a military alliance looking for an enemy to fight.
NATO is history’s most expensive self-licking ice cream cone. Proponents spent much of the last three decades taking bold, often destructive policy actions to convince taxpayers of member nations the alliance needs to keep existing. We’ve redrawn the world map multiple times and even invented new forms of war just to give it something to do. It’s madness, but few have been willing to say so.
In 1948, the First Secretary-General of NATO, Lord Hastings Ismay, said: "NATO existed to 'keep the Americans in, the Russians out and the Germans down." None of those justifications is valid anymore. The most successful military alliance of the 20th century is of no more use to America's defense than a World War I dreadnaught.
It can be argued that NATO's Eastern expansion was probably unnecessary. If Eastern Europe were concerned about a revanchist Russia, it could have developed its own regional alliance to counter any threats.
Trump did not kill NATO. The alliance committed suicide after looking for another reason to exist and, not finding one, put itself out of its own misery.
