Excerpts:

When the president talks about security in the Arctic, he’s talking about climate change.

Their aim, the vice president said in a video on X, is to check up on Greenland’s security, because unnamed other countries could “use its territories and its waterways to threaten the United States.” And these are real concerns for the United States, rooted in climate change: As polar ice melts away, superpowers are vying for newly open shipping routes in the Arctic Ocean and largely unexplored mineral and fossil-fuel reserves. Arctic warming could pose a direct threat to America’s security interests too: Alaska could have new vulnerabilities to both China and Russia; changes in ocean salinity and temperature might interfere with submarine detection systems; the extremes of climate change, including permafrost thaw in Russia, could drive economic instability, social unrest, and territorial claims.

So far this term, Trump has acted as if climate change does not matter: He has withdrawn from the Paris Agreement, announced plans to reopen the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge for oil and gas drilling, and paused new offshore-wind development and Inflation Reduction Act clean-energy funding. But if the president’s bid for Greenland—or the U.S. military’s quiet cooperation with Canada to boost Arctic defenses—is any indication, the U.S. is weighing its options for a warmer future. “We live in the real world,” Evan Bloom, a global fellow at the Wilson Center’s Polar Institute and former State Department official, told me. “The military and other agencies will continue to take climate change into account, because they have to.” When he hears Trump talk about Greenland, he hears the president speaking about the geopolitics of climate change—“whether he’s willing to call it that or not.”

  • oxjox@lemmy.mlOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    5 days ago

    I don’t know how much weight I put into this piece, given that we’re talking about Trump, but I appreciate the perspective. From my understanding, the US has always had a good relationship with Greenland and could have easily worked with them to increase defenses and security. There could certainly be another objective like mining natural resources or, I dunno, building crypto mining facilities. The whole thing should be offensive to all Americans, especially conservatives.

      • oxjox@lemmy.mlOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        5 days ago

        In a way that he has ulterior motives he’s not telling the public, I’d agree with that. It turns out that he’s the most politician-y politician.

  • FriendBesto@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    5 days ago

    We Went to Greenland to Ask About a Trump Takeover - POLITICO

    "U.S. interest in Greenland remained the stuff of private, long-range government planning until news broke in August 2019 that Trump had become preoccupied with the idea of buying the island.

    The idea reportedly sprang from a conversation with Estée Lauder heir Ronald Lauder, president of the World Jewish Congress, though a person close to Lauder said that notion of an outright purchase originated elsewhere. “Lauder never said to buy Greenland,” said the person, who was granted anonymity to discuss a private conversation. Instead, the person said, Lauder merely told Trump it was “in our interest to engage more, have deeper ties.”"