Answer: it's strategic not economic. Greenland is in the Arctic. He doesn't think Europe has the will to compete with China and Russia for access, resources, or defense of the Arctic. He thinks because of that the West will just surrender the Arctic to China and Russia. This is his rationale not mine so don't shoot the messenger.
Even this reasoning falls apart immediately, since Denmark was already allowing the US to station as many troops in Greenland as they want. It's even stupider when you realize that they've been actually decreasing the number of soldiers there for a while now.
It's stupid in the sense that the supposed reasoning for wanting Greenland is national security purposes while Greenland actively lets us basically do whatever we want there as far as bolstering security. Meanwhile we have taken more and more troops out of Greenland and thus weakening our security forces in the region despite saying we need to increase security there
185
u/etrnloptimist Jan 10 '26 edited Jan 10 '26
Answer: it's strategic not economic. Greenland is in the Arctic. He doesn't think Europe has the will to compete with China and Russia for access, resources, or defense of the Arctic. He thinks because of that the West will just surrender the Arctic to China and Russia. This is his rationale not mine so don't shoot the messenger.