Now that Venezuela is under U.S. control, the next two primary candidates for American intervention in the Western Hemisphere are Greenland and Cuba. President Donald Trump has made clear he wants to completely annex the former and is considering overthrowing the regime of the latter, with the possibly of running the country as he is now doing with Venezuela. And since America is nearly a century deep into the age of near-absolute Executive Branch power, what Trump wants is probably what Trump will get.
That’s not to say that there aren’t legitimate arguments for turning Greenland into a U.S. territory or ousting the China-friendly communist regime 90 miles south of Florida. Various U.S. administrations have tried to get Greenland for more than a century, as we’ve covered in previous reports, because of its abundance of natural resources and its valuable geostrategic location. And if Cuba doesn’t meet the parameters for Monroe Doctrine-esque intervention, then almost nothing else does. We encourage our readers to take in an analysis we recently published on the Monroe Doctrine here.
Unfortunately, this administration has developed a pattern of pursuing the right idea in the wrong way. That was certainly the case with tariffs, as we explained last May, and it’s almost assuredly the case with Venezuela for the simple reason that the president took war action without Congressional approval, violating the U.S. Constitution.
Greenland
Regarding Greenland, Representative Randy Fine (R-Fla.) introduced on Monday a bill to make Greenland the 51st state. The “Greenland Annexation and Statehood Act” is just two pages long, with the meat of the proposal encompassing one lone paragraph. The bill is written as a permission slip for Trump to do what it takes to get Greenland and then get Congress to rubber-stamp the territory into the Union. According to the bill, “The President is authorized to take such steps as may be necessary, including by seeking to enter into negotiations with the Kingdom of Denmark, to annex or otherwise acquire Greenland as a territory of the United States.”
Once the territory is taken:
“… the President shall submit to Congress a report consisting of such changes to Federal law as the President may determine necessary to admit the newly acquired territory as a State, in order to expedite congressional approval of such statehood for Greenland after the adoption of a constitution that Congress determines to be republican in form and in conformity with the Constitution of the United States. “
Fine echoed Trump’s talking points about Greenland’s national security value in a statement about the bill. “Greenland is not a distant outpost we can afford to ignore — it is a vital national security asset,” he said. “Whoever controls Greenland controls key Arctic shipping lanes and the security architecture protecting the United States. America cannot leave that future in the hands of regimes that despise our values and seek to undermine our security.”
Chinese Connection
Fine also repeated another Trump administration talking point: Barring American intervention, Greenland will fall under some form of Chinese or Russian domination. “My bill will protect our homeland, secure our economic future, and ensure that America — not China or Russia — sets the rules in the Arctic,” wrote Fine.
The Trump administration’s Greenland concerns are shared by national security experts. Alexander Gray, a senior fellow at the American Foreign Policy Council and former chief of staff of the National Security Council under Trump, penned a Wall Street Journal op-ed titled “Why Trump Really Should ‘Buy’ Greenland” some time ago. Among his points:
If [Greenland] separates from Denmark, it would be responsible for its own security, a task it is ill-equipped to handle. This is a grave concern given the second important development: Russia and China are threatening the status quo in the Arctic. Moscow has claimed significant chunks of the Arctic Sea, including inside Greenland’s Exclusive Economic Zone…. China has declared itself a “near-Arctic state,” [and] established a shipping network called the “Polar Silk Road” to bind Arctic communities closer to Beijing’s economic and political agenda.… Western security and economic interests would be threatened if an independent Greenland surrounded by predatory foreign actors lacked outside protection.
The Chinese recently chimed in with their take on the Greenland saga. Foreign Ministry spokesperson Mao Ning warned the United States “not to use other countries as a ‘pretext’ for its ambitions in Greenland, saying its activities in the Arctic comply with international law and aim to promote peace and stability,” according to reports.
Greenland’s Opinion
Trump has said the United States will have Greenland “one way or another.” The administration has refused to rule out military action when pressed by reporters. But neither Denmark, which claims the large icy island as a territory, nor the people who live there want Greenland to move into Uncle Sam’s house. On Monday, Greenland’s prime minister, Jens-Frederik Nielsen, reasserted this position. “Greenland is a part of the Kingdom of Denmark and a part of NATO through the Commonwealth,” Nielsen said in a Facebook post. “This means, our security and defense belong to NATO. It’s a basic and fixed line.” The prime minister said that they’ll work to create defense around Greenland but within the context of NATO, which will include the United States. He concluded, saying that Greenland is “a democratic society, which makes our own decisions.”
Most recently, Nielsen said on Tuesday his nation would rather remain a Danish territory than become part of the United States, suggesting that it would be willing to forget aspirations of complete autonomy.
Trump has mocked the idea of Greenland increasing security, saying that means they’ve added another dog sled team.
Danish Defiance
As for the Danes, they’ve gone from stern defiance to outright suggestions that they were willing to get into a war over the island. Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen published a statement on X, saying:
I have to say this very directly to the United States. It makes absolutely no sense to talk about the United States needing to take over Greenland. The U.S. has no right to annex one of the three countries in the Danish Kingdom.
And last week, the Danish defense minister told Danish outlet Berlingske that “Danish troops will immediately respond to any invasion of Greenland with force,” according to British media. “Soldiers would be required to counter any foreign invasion without awaiting orders under the military’s rules of engagement.”
Around the time of these comments, Reuters broke the news that the White House was trying to bribe Greenlanders with lump payments of thousands of dollars in an effort to warm them to the idea of becoming part of America. “U.S. officials, including White House aides, have discussed payment figures ranging from $10,000 to $100,000,” Reuters reported. The total cost, considering the island’s population of about 57,000, could range from $500 million to nearly $6 billion.
President of Cuba
Meanwhile, closer to the mainland, Secretary of State Marco Rubio may soon be wearing another hat. Trump indirectly suggested on Sunday that Rubio may become the president of Cuba. Trump reposted a tweet by someone who said, “Marco Rubio will be president of Cuba,” with his own comment. “Sounds good to me,” the president said.
Trump said during the press conference following the U.S. attack on Venezuela that his administration was considering similar action in Cuba. The Cubans, who were deeply entrenched in Venezuela’s communist regime, said they lost 32 people when the Americans descended on Caracas and nabbed Nicolás Maduro.
More recently, Trump has urged Havana to “make a deal” with Washington lest it be cut off from Venezuelan oil proceeds. Trump said on social media, “Cuba lived, for many years, on large amounts of OIL and MONEY from Venezuela. In return, Cuba provided ‘Security Services’ for the last two Venezuelan dictators, BUT NOT ANYMORE! THERE WILL BE NO MORE OIL OR MONEY GOING TO CUBA — ZERO!”
Cuban leader Miguel Díaz-Canel pushed back, saying, “No one dictates what we do.” Maduro shook his fist in similar fashion of defiance — and then Uncle Sam came in and swooped him up.
Might Makes Right
Will the Trump administration pull off regime change in Cuba, something the CIA tried and failed with the Bay of Pigs invasion in 1961? With Trump, there’s no telling. The president has shown that he’s more likely to not only ignore Constitutional restraints, but even those of the polite international society. He appears to have no qualms with upsetting European allies, suggesting that he doesn’t view the Europeans as the best of friends. He also believes that for too long, U.S. antagonists, China especially, have degraded our neighborhood.
As a seemingly unapologetic advocate of the philosophy that might makes right, the second Trump administration could become one of the most transformational presidencies in U.S. history, certainly in modern times. But at what cost?
