From: user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid   
      
   On 1/7/26 10:27 AM, Dude wrote:   
   > On 1/6/2026 6:55 PM, dart200 wrote:   
   >> On 1/6/26 6:53 PM, dart200 wrote:   
   >>> On 1/6/26 10:21 AM, Julian wrote:   
   >>>> It was the Viking, Eric the Red who, in AD 986, first saw   
   >>>> Greenland’s potential. He wanted to colonise his newly-discovered   
   >>>> island, and in a blatant piece of tenth-century spin-doctoring hit   
   >>>> on a wizard wheeze to encourage other Norse people to come to this   
   >>>> bleak, icy and remote corner of the unknown world:   
   >>>>   
   >>>> ‘In the summer, Erik left to settle in the country he had found,   
   >>>> which he called Greenland, as he said people would be attracted   
   >>>> there if it had a favourable name.‘   
   >>>>   
   >>>> More than a thousand years later, US president Donald Trump is   
   >>>> proposing something similar.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> ‘It’s a large real estate deal. Owning Greenland is vital for US   
   >>>> security… and economic security… It’s an absolute necessity and I   
   >>>> cannot assure you that we would not use military or economic coercion.‘   
   >>>>   
   >>>> That may sound outlandish. But Trump’s ambition isn’t new. America   
   >>>> has controlled Greenland before: during the Second World War, it   
   >>>> became a de facto US protectorate. The US has also previously sought   
   >>>> to buy Greenland; in 1946, it offered $100 million in gold bullion;   
   >>>> around $7 billion in today’s money.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> For now, Greenland belongs to Denmark. But Denmark’s ownership of   
   >>>> Greenland is itself a piece of bare-faced colonialism, as a glance   
   >>>> at their policy of forced assimilation in the 1940s and 50s makes   
   >>>> clear. As a result, the Danes are much resented by most Greenlanders.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Greenland has been moving towards independence almost as long as it   
   >>>> has been a colony of Denmark. They were granted Home Rule in 1979.   
   >>>> This was expanded to full self-rule with the 2009 Self-Government   
   >>>> Act – legislation that also handed Greenland the right to declare   
   >>>> independence. Today, Denmark retains control only of defence,   
   >>>> foreign affairs, and monetary policy. The 2023 Greenlandic   
   >>>> constitution explicitly commits the island to independence; and in   
   >>>> his 2025 New Year speech, Greenland’s prime minister, Múte Egede,   
   >>>> called for an end to ‘the shackles of colonialism’ and a future   
   >>>> shaped by Greenlanders themselves.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> The final umbilical cord linking Greenland to Denmark is the annual   
   >>>> block grant of 3.9 billion kroner (roughly £410 million), making up   
   >>>> about 19 per cent of Greenland’s GDP. But to put that in   
   >>>> perspective, it is less than the amount annually spent by the US on   
   >>>> the city of El Paso, Texas. And it is minuscule compared to the   
   >>>> mineral wealth Greenland could one day command in partnership with a   
   >>>> deep-pocketed ally, of whom there are at least three: America, China   
   >>>> and Russia.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> China, in particular, has shown intense interest. At one point,   
   >>>> Beijing proposed a $2.5 billion (£1.8 billion) investment in a   
   >>>> Greenlandic mine (more than the island’s entire GDP), which would   
   >>>> have brought in 5,000 Chinese workers. Then they proposed massive   
   >>>> infrastructure investments, including a deep-sea port and two   
   >>>> international airports. These would require capital which would   
   >>>> leave Greenland beholden for all time. Denmark and the US,   
   >>>> unsurprisingly, blocked these plans.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> So why are the great powers so keen to own Greenland? Natural   
   >>>> resources are a big reason why. The great powers’ unashamed lust for   
   >>>> Greenland’s rare earths is but one element of a global race to   
   >>>> control the production of the strategic minerals which are essential   
   >>>> components of batteries, phones, electric vehicles and all modern   
   >>>> computing devices. It’s about silicon, germanium, phosphorus, boron,   
   >>>> indium phosphide, gallium, graphite, uranium, copper, lithium,   
   >>>> cobalt and nickel, among others. He who controls their production   
   >>>> holds the key to the digital globe.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Odd as it may sound, it’s also about Taiwan. Taiwan manufactures   
   >>>> over 60 per cent of the world’s semiconductors and more than 90 per   
   >>>> cent of its most advanced chips. If China were ever to carry out its   
   >>>> threat to invade Taiwan (which some observers think may be imminent,   
   >>>> perhaps encouraged by Donald Trump’s daring raid on Venezuela), it   
   >>>> would gain near-total control of the global microchip supply. Do we   
   >>>> really want to be dependent on China for every phone, computer and   
   >>>> electric vehicle produced in the West?   
   >>>>   
   >>>> The US needs to develop chip-making capabilities comparable to   
   >>>> Taiwan’s. To achieve this it needs reliable sources for the 50 or so   
   >>>> critical minerals required. And Greenland holds concentrated   
   >>>> quantities of 30 of them, amounting to a considerable chunk of the   
   >>>> world’s total rare earth reserves. But the reality is that with a   
   >>>> population of just 57,000 – many of them Inuit fishermen and hunters   
   >>>> – Greenland lacks the industrial infrastructure to extract these   
   >>>> minerals. Both China and the US would be keen to fill that gap.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Another great attraction of Greenland is its strategic position. As   
   >>>> the ice melts – at a rate of as much as 270 billion tonnes per year   
   >>>> – several strategic sea routes are being opened up. The world is   
   >>>> waking up to the potential strategic value of Greenland, the largest   
   >>>> non- continental island on Earth. Greenland controls the top end of   
   >>>> the Greenland–Iceland–UK Gap. This area is crucial to Nato submarine   
   >>>> surveillance and was vital in resupplying Europe during WWII. It   
   >>>> also hosts the Thule Air Base (now renamed Pituffik Space Base), an   
   >>>> essential part of US air defence and missile early warning systems.   
   >>>> Any Russian missile strike on the US would pass directly over   
   >>>> Greenland. Since 2017, Thule has housed a key ballistic missile   
   >>>> detection system, with nearly $4 billion (£3 billion) in upgrades   
   >>>> recently approved.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> The increasingly ice-free Northwest Passage skirts Greenland’s   
   >>>> shores. There’s even talk of a deep-sea port to serve the emerging   
   >>>> Northern Sea Route or NorthEast passage), either in Iceland or –   
   >>>> just possibly – in East Greenland. In 2019, Mike Pompeo called   
   >>>> Arctic sea- lanes the ’21st- century Suez and Panama Canals.’ If the   
   >>>> US controlled Greenland, it would control access to these routes as   
   >>>> well.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> So yes: Greenland’s strategic value to the US is unambiguous, and   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)