It is 98% likely Trump’s just trolling. By that I mean he is not considering using force, but he does want them. What is more likely is he may use trade sanctions as a way to pressure Denmark and Panama.
Wanting territory on the grounds of national security is of course what Putin uses as his justification to try and turn Ukraine into a slave state, so it isn’t a good reason.
Greenland is a simple case. Just as I support the Falklander Island residents deciding who governs the Falklands, the same goes for Greenlanders and Greenland. It is a territory of Denmark, but has been inhabited by Norsemen and Inuit for many centuries. It has voted to remain part of Denmark and has its own Government.
The Panama Canal is a bit more nuanced. It was constructed first by France and then by the US on territory controlled by Colombia, France and the US. It was controlled by the US until 1977 when a treaty handed over control to Panama from 1999.
However the treaty allows the U.S. the permanent right to defend the canal from any threat that might interfere with its continued neutral service to ships of all nations.
The two 1977 treaties were ratified by Panama with a 67% vote in favour in a referendum and a 96% turnout.
The US Senate ratified both treaties by a 68 to 32 vote, legally binding the US to them. There was significant opposition to the Treaties, but the Senate ratified them by a 2:1 margin.
Denmark is a member of NATO, so I don’t see anything will happen with regard to Greenland except possible trade sanctions against Denmark. This could lead to retaliatory sanctions from the entire EU though.
With the Panama Canal it is possible the US House and Senate could pass a law nullifying the Treaty and demanding control be handed back. This would not be legal under international law, but could provide a pretext for Trump to seize it. More likely though is the Panama Canal drops its fees, which appear to be driving some of the rhetoric.
David Farrar runs Curia Market Research, a specialist opinion polling and research agency, and the popular Kiwiblog where this article was sourced. He previously worked in the Parliament for eight years, serving two National Party Prime Ministers and three Opposition Leaders.
Greenland is a simple case. Just as I support the Falklander Island residents deciding who governs the Falklands, the same goes for Greenlanders and Greenland. It is a territory of Denmark, but has been inhabited by Norsemen and Inuit for many centuries. It has voted to remain part of Denmark and has its own Government.
The Panama Canal is a bit more nuanced. It was constructed first by France and then by the US on territory controlled by Colombia, France and the US. It was controlled by the US until 1977 when a treaty handed over control to Panama from 1999.
However the treaty allows the U.S. the permanent right to defend the canal from any threat that might interfere with its continued neutral service to ships of all nations.
The two 1977 treaties were ratified by Panama with a 67% vote in favour in a referendum and a 96% turnout.
The US Senate ratified both treaties by a 68 to 32 vote, legally binding the US to them. There was significant opposition to the Treaties, but the Senate ratified them by a 2:1 margin.
Denmark is a member of NATO, so I don’t see anything will happen with regard to Greenland except possible trade sanctions against Denmark. This could lead to retaliatory sanctions from the entire EU though.
With the Panama Canal it is possible the US House and Senate could pass a law nullifying the Treaty and demanding control be handed back. This would not be legal under international law, but could provide a pretext for Trump to seize it. More likely though is the Panama Canal drops its fees, which appear to be driving some of the rhetoric.
David Farrar runs Curia Market Research, a specialist opinion polling and research agency, and the popular Kiwiblog where this article was sourced. He previously worked in the Parliament for eight years, serving two National Party Prime Ministers and three Opposition Leaders.
1 comment:
David , Greenland as a nation are in the process of requesting independence from Denmark. This is a very important omission from your contribution. It could be an attractive option for Greenland to be aligned with close USA instead of far away Denmark and their NATO alliance, whose presumed future demand for extra defense budget will include Greenland citizens ..
Post a Comment