Barely days into the inauguration of President-elect Donald Trump as the 47th President on January 20th, the comity of nations is getting ready for a new era. Trump’s elevation comes at a time when the geopolitical stature of the US is on a relative decline. Be as it may, a change in political dispensation in the US, the lone superpower is bound to have a pertinent impact on the world order.
Trump's pompous statements on Greenland, Canada and the Panama
Canal have alerted the world of the diplomatic trajectory that would befall.
Joined at the hip, all these three issues are pivotal for the US quest to
dominate the Arctic region and maritime shipping lanes.
Trump’s interest in Greenland and Canada are formidably linked to
US pursuit to bolster its presence in the Arctic region. China’s rapid strides
to actively enter the Arctic region are making Washington uncomfortable.
Forthright about his plans to take over the world’s largest
island, Greenland, in December Trump announced “For purposes of National
security and Freedom throughout the world, the United States of America feels
that the ownership and control of Greenland is an absolute necessity”. In
his 45-minute confrontational call with Denmark Prime Minister Mette
Frederiksen, five days before his inauguration, as per insiders, Trump once
again mounted pressure on Denmark. He renewed his threats to wrest Greenland
even as PM Frederiksen argued that it was up to Greenland itself to make a
decision on independence.
Trump’s undisguised expansionist moves drew quick reactions, for
his awkward interventions are bound to intensify geopolitical conflicts. His
announcements replete with resurrecting American hegemony, coercion and
recolonisation all under the guise of “MAGA” are meted fairly with criticism
and rebuke. Trump’s attempt to buy Greenland is thus far, America’s fourth
attempt to purchase the island.
In 1867 US Secretary of State William H Seward negotiated the purchase
of Alaska from Russia and the islands of St. Thomas and St. Jones from Denmark.
He even recommended the acquisition of Iceland and Greenland from Denmark.
Again in 1910, US Ambassador to Denmark Francis Egan strongly
exhorted that the US trade Mindanao for Greenland and the Danish West Indies;
Denmark could in turn trade Mindanao to Germany for Northern Schleswig. Egan
made this based on inputs from his friends and was circulated by the US
government. But after Denmark regained Northern Schleswig after Germany’s
defeat in World War I followed by the 1920 Schleswig plebiscite, this proposal was
never made by the US.
Greenland was claimed by both Norway and Denmark. But after the
two separated, Denmark strengthened its claims over Greenland by offering
support to the Inuit migrants, especially during the Little Ice Age period when
living conditions became extremely harsh. Denmark’s claims were further
bolstered by the International Court of Justice ruling of 1933 which asserted its
position on Greenland.
During the Second World War when Germany invaded Denmark, Danish
ambassador Henrik Kauffman signed a treaty with President Roosevelt authorising
the establishment of American bases on the island. The Thule Air Base of
Greenland served as the northern base of the USAF.
In 1946 the US State Department official John Hickerson deemed
Greenland a “military necessity” and “indispensable for the safety of
the US”. He strongly recommended its acquisition from Denmark. Accordingly,
Secretary of State James Byrnes made a formal offer to Danish Foreign Minister
Gustav Rasmussen to purchase Greenland.
The memorandum indeed made two offers- a 99-year lease of the
island with the US bearing complete responsibility for its defence and the
second being the direct purchase of the island for 100 million USD in gold
bullion. While the proposal was rejected over reports of non-endorsement by
President Truman, the US retained its bases in Greenland.
Greenland joined NATO in 1949 and served as an important launch
pad for American missiles. It houses the US’s early warning missile defence
system. Greenland was granted autonomy in 1979 and exited the European Union in
1985.
During the Cold War period, Denmark heavily relied on the US to
defend Greenland. Indeed in 1968 both Denmark and the US governments worked
together following a B52 bomber crash into the sea ice close to Thule. The
bomber carried four thermonuclear bombs and to decontaminate the entire region,
countries launched Project Crested Ice for eight months.
During his first term, Trump evinced his interest in purchasing
Greenland in 2019 eliciting sharp reactions. The Danish Prime Minister Mette
Frederiksen called it an “absurd” offer. Trump’s reiterations on 7th
January 2025 have got Denmark on its heels. Danish Defence Minister pledged
Euro 1.3 billion for Denmark’s Arctic Command.
Coinciding with Trump Jr’s visit to Greenland, Danish King
Frederikson reissued a royal coat of arms that prominently featured the symbols
of Greenland and the Faroe Islands. In his New Year speech, he said, “We are
all united and each of us committed for the kingdom of Denmark. From the Danish
minority in South Schleswig – which is even situated outside the kingdom – and
all the way to Greenland. We belong together”.
Greenland Prime Minister Mute Egede rejected Trump’s proposal
saying, “Greenland is ours. We are not for sale and will never be for sale.
We must not lose our long struggle for freedom.” Trump’s statement accelerated
Greenland’s Constitution drafting process and spurred dreams for freedom. With
elections scheduled before April 2025, Greenland is likely to be independent.
Instead of indulging in strategic investment negotiations with an
independent Greenland which could have been a mutually beneficial scenario,
Trump’s fanatical fixation to acquire the Artic Island is freaking out its
European allies. Endowed with rich natural resources including rare earths and
located in the Arctic Circle at the crossroads of the North Sea Route of
Russia, Greenland is a formidable strategic asset.
This unsinkable naval base strategically located at the GUIK gap
(Greenland UK and Iceland) is an important maritime chokepoint through which
Russia’s Northern fleet can enter the Atlantic. The climate change has made the
North Sea Routes a veritable reality. Hence, Greenland is pivotal for the NATO.
Regular patrolling and controlling of this region are essential to ensure open
sea lines of communication between the US and Europe. British Royal Naval used
to survey this region but with its Naval strength depleting, the Russian and
Chinese ships are creeping across the Atlantic.
The US could enhance its Arctic presence and probably give China a
run for its money by negotiating strategic investments in Greenland. But Trump’s
muscular threat, “to tariff Denmark at a very high level” coupled with
his warning that, “they should give up (Greenland)- because we need it for
national security. That’s for the free world” have raised fresh doubts
about the real intentions of Trump.
The competition for the Arctic is certainly warming up. Ironically,
the biggest naysayer of climate change, Trump, at the helm, is heralding a
policy to mitigate the consequences of the changing geopolitical realities of a
melting Arctic.
Ukraine conflict has ruptured the relative calm of the Arctic that
remained largely insular despite geopolitical turbulences elsewhere. But now
things are changing. Russia is a major stakeholder of the Arctic region with
over 50% of its territory spanning the Arctic Circle. Russian dependency on
China increased since the 2022 Ukraine conflict. Leveraging this dependency, China
is eyeing to become an active player in the Arctic region.
China self-proclaimed itself as a ‘near-Arctic State’ in 2012 and
made public its aspirations to become a “Polar Power” in 2014. Soon
Beijing unveiled the ‘Arctic Silk Road’ framework to capitalise on the economic
benefits from the impending Arctic thaw. As part of its “Arctic Strategy” China
steadily intensified direct and indirect scientific cooperation with Arctic
States. In 2018 China launched its first indigenously built icebreaker Xue Long
2 for scientific exploration along the maritime Artic route or the Northern Sea
Routes.
Russia with a large fleet of 40 icebreakers and two combat
icebreakers operated by Rosatomflot along with China’s rapid build of
icebreakers are a dominant force in the Arctic while the US continues to
struggle with its ancient icebreakers. The US’s Polar Security Cutter Program
grappling with delays finally purchased its first civilian icebreaker in
decades in December 2024 while Beijing unveiled its fourth icebreaker recently.
For decades, the US has neglected the Arctic. Waking up to the
burgeoning Sino-Russian Arctic collaboration, the US administration announced a
slew of fresh sanctions on January 13 making Russian Arctic crude sales difficult.
These sanctions have indeed forced South Korea to step back from building any
icebreakers for Russia.
US’s sudden urgency to dominate the Arctic is indeed at the heart
of Trump’s statement of making Canada its 51st state. The US hardly
has any toehold in the Arctic. It doesn’t even have a deep port in the region.
For decades, the US and Canada had differences over the Northwest Passage
(NWP). Canada declared that all water within the Canadian archipelago and the
water routes in the NWP are its internal waters over which it has full control
and authority. But the US deems the NWP as an international strait.
Trudeau's government reasserted the Canadian position in the 2019 Arctic
and Northern Policy Framework. It states- “Canada’s Arctic sovereignty is
longstanding and well established….. Canada will continue to exercise the full
extent of its rights and sovereignty over its land territory and its Arctic
waters, including the Northwest Passage”.
President George Bush in the 2009 National Security Presidential
Directive and Homeland Security Presidential Directive distinctly enunciated
the US stance which reads, “The Northwest Passage is a strait used for
international navigation, and the Northern Sea Route includes straits used for
international navigation; the regime of transit passage applies to passage
through those straits”. President Obama reaffirmed the position in his 2013
National Strategy for the Arctic Region.
Canadians and more so Canadian Indigenous People strongly proclaim
that “the Arctic is a fundamental part of its heritage, its identity as a
country and its future”. With Trump breathing down its neck, to strengthen
its Arctic dominance, Canada has recently bid for 12 Air-Independent Propulsion
(AIP) Submarines. Unfortunately, the Canadian Navy which is in shambles and
withering is incapable of defending the High North.
The US is lagging in the Arctic race. The late realisation that
has dawned on Washington is the reason for Trump’s sabre rattling. Though Trump
has ruled out using force, he slapped 25% tariffs on Canada effective from
February 1. In his latest offer, Trump obliged to revoke the tariffs if Canada conceded
to a merger with the US.
In equal measure, Trump’s pugnacious remarks have irked
Panamanians who consider the Panama Canal central to their identity. According to a study by IDB Invest, nearly
23.6 % of Panama’s annual income is generated from the Canal which accrues a
profit of $ 5 billion.
Panama has struck a deal with the US to protect its freedom from
Colombia. President Roosevelt sent gunboats to the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans
to assist Panama in getting independence from Colombia. Soon, the US deployed
men from the Caribbean to undertake the arduous canal construction. It
controlled the Canal which became a vital asset for American commerce.
The US paid Panama $10 million for the territory and $250,000
every year since 1914. The Canal divided
the country into two. The area controlled by the US was off-limits to the
Panamanians. This turned the natives restive and riots broke out in 1964.
Finally, in 1977, President Jimmy Carter reached an agreement with Panama
leader Colonel Omar Torrijos to jointly operate the Canal. In December 1999,
the Canal was completely handed over to Panama. The defining features of the
US-Panama agreement are the Treaty concerning Permanent Neutrality and
non-discriminatory tolls. The final agreement bestowed the US the right to
intervene militarily to keep Panama Open.
Trump asserting his protestation announced to ‘take back’ Panama
Canal for the “ridiculous, highly unfair” fees in his inauguration
speech. Earlier he avowed, “This complete rip-off of our country will
immediately stop, if shipping rates were not lowered” and added, “We
will demand that the Panama Canal be returned to us, in full, quickly and
without question”.
Nearly 5% of the global maritime tariff passes through the Canal.
The US is the leading user of the Canal followed distantly by China and Japan. When
the world was busy with the transfer of Hong Kong from the UK, Hutchinson Ports
of China obtained the contract to operate two important ports close to the
Canal- Balboa on the Pacific coast and Cristóbal on the Atlantic side in 1997. This
contract was renewed for 25 years in 2021. Over the years, China aggressively
increased its presence in Panama with infrastructure building.
Catering to the burgeoning freight traffic, Panama expanded the
Canal with a third set of gates for the passage of high tonnage carriers by
2016. The first cargo to pass the Canal belonged to China. Around the same
time, Panamanian President Juan Carlos Varela severed ties with Taiwan and
became the first Latin American country to join BRI in 2018.
China is now the major trading partner of the Latin American
countries after the US. It is emerging as a dominant force in Latin America and
the Caribbean; the proverbial backyard of the US. Raising concerns over China’s
increased engagement in the region, the US South Command indicated that China
is building around 40 ports in and around the Panama Canal. Competing Chinese interests
are posing a big threat to American interests. Implicitly so, Trump is invoking
the Monroe.
As per the US Constitution, the President has the executive power
to interpret and terminate treaties. But Trump’s bellicose statements coupled
with repeated assertions including the use of force surmised his blatant
violation of international norms which Washington accuses the authoritarian
regimes of.
Trump’s irascible grounds for acquiring Greenland and coercive posturing
for the merger of Canada made under the garb of security of a “free world”
reeks of hegemonistic expansionism. Trump’s perspicuous opening remarks, “I
will, very simply, put America first. Our sovereignty will be reclaimed” and
his menacing statements on Panama Canal, Greenland and Canada are evincive of Xi
Jinping’s New Year speech, “We Chinese on both sides of the Taiwan Strait
belong to one and the same family”.
If coercion and intimidation are permissible for a democratic US
for national security, should Russia be subjected to global indignation for the
Ukraine conflict as Ukraine was part of the erstwhile Soviet Union. Logically,
China’s Middle Kingdom dream and India’s Akhand Bharat rationale must also be
licit.
In his pursuit to control the entire Western Hemisphere including
the High North, Trump is ushering the US into the 19th century of
traditional power play. While China is smartly taking over the world with its
Digital Silk Route ramping up techno-dependencies of the developing countries.
As America transcends from neo-liberalism and runaway idealism to
an era of neo-imperialism of “might makes right”, Trump’s hegemonistic statecraft
can be an anathema to the “rule-based order” that the West passionately
advocates. Given the immense heft of the US, the geopolitical realism that Trump
attempts to assert would invariably return to the doctrine of “power submits
to power” where confrontation would become a norm.
No comments:
Post a Comment