Trump’s Greenland Obsession Is Madness. Can’t We Just Say That? – Foreign Policy

“Where is Greenland and why is it important to Trump?” This question comes from a recent BBC article – a perfect ‘backdrop’, to use journalistic terminology – that attempted to make sense of the US president’s latest campaign to seize the island. The text clearly explains that “there is a growing interest in Greenland’s natural resources, including rare earth minerals, uranium and iron.” He goes on to suggest that appropriating those riches may not be the main motivation for his obsession. The authors posit that US President Donald Trump is more concerned about “the threat he sees from Russia and China in the region.”

The updated version of the article then summarizes Trump’s speech in Davos, Switzerland, this week, including his assertion that “I don’t have to use force, I don’t want to use force, and I won’t use force.” (But listeners do not seem to have been entirely appeased, given the general incoherence of his statements, which repeatedly confused Greenland and Iceland.)

“Where is Greenland and why is it important to Trump?” The question comes from recently BBC article– a perfect ‘background’, to use journalistic terminology – for trying to understand the US president’s recent campaign to seize the island. The text clearly explains that “there is a growing interest in Greenland’s natural resources, including rare earth minerals, uranium and iron.” He goes on to suggest that appropriating those riches may not be the main motivation for his obsession. The authors posit that US President Donald Trump is more concerned about “the threat he sees from Russia and China in the region.”

It then summarizes the updated version of the article Trump’s speech In Davos, Switzerland, this week, including his assertion that “I do not have to use force, I do not want to use force, and I will not use force.” (It doesn’t seem like the listeners were.) Completely appeased(Despite the general incoherence of his statements, which has repeatedly confused Greenland and Iceland.)

However, nowhere does the BBC article say that Trump is fully capable of doing this Exploitation of natural resources in Greenland Short of stealing land from Denmark – or else the whole resource argument is nonsense for a number of reasons, ranging from the fact that supposedly important mineral riches are covered by a thick layer of permafrost to the fact that the US already has plenty of these resources, and the problem is expensive mining and refining, not access to the deposits.

The BBC also does not consider it necessary to tell its readers that the United States does not need to seize the island in order to defend it against perceived security threats. There were 10,000 American soldiers stationed in Greenland at various points during the Cold War before Washington chose to withdraw them. The Danes have made it clear that the Americans can bring back as many as they want, and there is even a written agreement dating back to 1951 guaranteeing US access. Russian threat? please. If Trump is concerned about Russia — for which we have less than zero evidence — he can weaken it cheaply, effectively, and without losing a single American life by supporting Ukraine.

In fact, there is no logical reason why the United States would need to seize Greenland. The only reason we’re talking about this now is because Trump decided to. There is no American politician In living memory The idea was proposed before Trump arrived on the political scene. Without it, we would have no reason to worry about it – especially given its potential costs, which could include NATO division separate. As often happens with this president, there is no political logic here, no planning process, and no coherence Ideological background– Just one man’s whim. The fact that some of us are willing to respond with even a modicum of respect attests to troubling flaws in our collective psychology.

This is the prominent Council on Foreign Relations, which is duly meeting Expert panel About “Greenland in the Geopolitical Spotlight.” Or think about the vector of thought that Formal notes “Trump is right to highlight Greenland’s strategic importance to America’s security,” although it might be advisable to downplay “the gun threat” — all you really need to do, the author assures us, is start “improving transit and economic links between the United States and Greenland.” Meanwhile, A USA Today columnist announces “I can’t think of good reasons why he wouldn’t at least try to annex Greenland through negotiations.” A former advisor to the Ministry of Defense He speaks “Greenland’s importance is increasing as we find ourselves in global competition with China and in a new technological revolution in terms of warfare.” Even Wikipedia, Accidental goal Out of Trump’s anger, it was created Private page Entitled “The Proposed Acquisition of Greenland by the United States,” it duly evaluates the plan from every conceivable angle.

Didn’t they notice? Didn’t they read Trump’s speech? text For the Norwegian Prime Minister? Dear Jonas: Given that your country has decided not to award me the Nobel Peace Prize because it has stopped 8 wars in addition, I no longer feel obligated to think purely about peace, even though it will always prevail, but I can now think about what is good and right for the United States of America. Yes, certainly, failure to receive a well-deserved peace prize would make any real man reach for his gun.

Then there is Britain’s plan to hand over the island of Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean, home to a critical US military base, to Mauritius. Trump It has been described The move is “another in a very long line of national security reasons why Greenland should be acquired.” On another occasion, Trump did just that He said simply Having Greenland is “psychologically important” to him. The US President reacts to consistency and consistency like a vampire to garlic.

Remarkably, both the Russians and the Chinese, ostensibly behind Trump’s seizure of Greenland, have been watching the latest actions with rapture. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov opinion Trump “will undoubtedly go down in the history books” if he is able to annex Greenland. When a Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman was asked about the uproar, he said: He responded“We have no intention of competing for influence with any country, and we never will” – a remarkably mild comment compared to some of Beijing’s usual rants. It is clear that both countries operate according to the sacred principle: never interrupt your enemy while he is making a mistake.

So why, exactly, do so many of us insist on taking Trump’s worst ideas seriously? Naturally, journalists have to report on what the president says, and they often end up amplifying nonsense and misinformation in the process. Trump and his aides have become gifted at “Flooding the area“And diverting attention from uncomfortable topics, they are well aware of this dynamic. All thinkers, scholars and politicians have their own reasons for treating Trump’s intellectual burps as topics of serious discussion. Some are angling for future government jobs. Some are afraid of being typecast as geeks. Some are desperate to look like gamers by moving into various fields.” Overton windows Stretched by Trump’s whim.

Psychologists have examined some of the cognitive mechanisms involved here. Humans feel very uncomfortable with the possibility of randomness; We tend to search for coherent patterns of interpretation even amidst chaos (Narrative bias). We tend to attribute deliberation and purpose to actions even when they are absent (Intentional bias). We allow our opinions to be unduly influenced by figures in positions of authority (Authority bias). Commentators may also fear that stating the obvious will make them unserious, so they write lengthy analyzes of the pros and cons of Trump’s proposal. Academics in particular have a strong tendency to invoke complex explanations (such as Trump’s supposed strategic priorities) when simpler explanations would suffice (such as Trump’s gut reaction). Students of the mind call this “Complexity bias“.

I doubt Trump has read a psychology textbook. However, he has repeatedly demonstrated a strong instinct to make others dance to his tune. His Greenland maneuver once again demonstrates his extraordinary ability to distort reality in ways that satisfy his ego and desire for dominance. This may actually be the real rationale for his seemingly illogical quest in the Arctic. The mere fact of declaring his desire for the island is evidence of his power; By taking it seriously, even if we disagree with its substance, we implicitly accept his rule-breaking redefinition of the rules. The psychoanalytic line is likely to take us much further than political discussions that highlight rationality and coherence in Trump’s actions.

We can only hope that the Europeans, who took a long time to wake up to the seriousness of Trump’s intentions, will not be put off by his conciliatory rhetoric in Davos. The president’s obsession with Greenland is far from over. But this latest crisis could yield some value if the rudeness and incompetence that Trump has displayed on the international stage breaks the spell he has cast on at least some Americans.