From Greenland to “Red, White and Blueland”: US Congressman’s bill

WASHINGTON: In a rather head-scratching moment, a United States (US) Congressman, Earl L “Buddy” Carter from the US state of Georgia, thought it really wise to introduce a bill that not only proposes acquiring Greenland from Denmark, but astutely rename it to the “Red, White and Blueland”. Sharp!

In the 119th session of the US Congress, our ‘Buddy’ from Georgia’s first district proposed the “H.R.1161: A Proposal for Greenland”, aiming to authorise the controversial US President, Donald J Trump, to negotiate acquisition of resource-rich territory from the Danes.

Read more: Trump’s first press conference hints a more prepared second term

In a nod to planetary naming practice, the H.R.1161 bill was introduced in the House of Representatives, where after introduction, it was referred to two important committees: the House of Committee on Foreign Affairs and the House Committee on Natural Resources. This is done so US lawmakers who specialise in foreign relations and resource management can evaluate, analyse and discuss the bill at length to ensure all angles and points are covered.

As of today, the text of the – ahem, rather colourful bill, shall we say – is not available for the general masses, no doubt adding more to the confusion.

As a real estate businessman, Trump has a rather colourful track record of dealing in rather shady business practices, including allegations of inflating property values, securing favourable loans under deceitful practices, among other. He also dropped a real gem recently, declaring gentrifying the encircled Gaza enclave by forcibly evicting the Palestinians living there, and not allowing them to return, even threatening military action if he ‘has to’.

The peaceful methods were also used to threaten Denmark into handing over the aforementioned ‘Red White and Blueland’—Greenland—from one of the United States closest allies and a NATO member.

With Trump’s ‘Buddy’ introducing the ‘Greenland bill’ in the US Congress, the potential for an eventual attainment of the Arctic territory is set in motion. This legislation raises some serious questions regarding the territorial ambitions of the world’s most powerful military. Acquiring Alaska from the Tsarist Russia is one matter; attempting to coerce a substantial territory from a steadfast ally is quite another.

Such actions would not only convey a troubling message to the United States’ Western allies, but also undermines the painstaking achievements the US has made in the post-Second World War and Cold War eras. The North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) was established with the US assuming the financial burden of securing Europe against the Soviet Union.

The US establishment had observed with increasing concern as more nations, particularly the declining European empires, acquired nuclear weapons following its own tests in the 1940s. While the “genie cannot be put back in the bottle”, it can certainly be contained. NATO was one of the mechanisms employed to contain the proliferation of the nuclear technology and to ensure US hegemony in the region.

Under the leadership of the mercurial and unpredictable Trump, the prospect of a US President issuing threats the country’s closest allies prior to assuming office has generated confusion and frightened the latter.

Denmark, as a US ally, participated in the invasions of Afghanistan in 2001 and Iraq in 2003. The invasion of Afghanistan alone resulted in the loss of 43 Danish soldiers and left over 200 injured, with an estimated financial cost of 15 billion kroner.

The Scandinavian country now risks losing a resource-rich territory of 2.2 million kilometres and home to just 56,000 inhabitants, to an ally it relies on for security. This situation unfolds as a war rages just two countries away in Ukraine, with a belligerent Russia furious over NATO’s presence so near its borders.

Historically, Greenland has been of interest to the United States due to its strategic location and natural resources. Greenland’s natural resources are estimated anywhere from $30 billion to $70 billion.

European Commission reported in 2023 that Greenland possessed over 25 ‘critical raw materials’. The Arctic territory is home to sixth largest deposit of uranium alone.

While the “Red, White and Blueland” may invite levity from many, it did serve a far more meaningful purpose. As per the US government website, the three colours on the country’s flag stand for valour and bravery (red), purity and innocence (white), and vigilance, perseverance and justice (blue).

Naming the ‘Greenland bill’ as such not only gives it a nationalistic tone but also lends it a sense of legitimacy, as the three colours embody what the US represents.

Trump is also not above threatening his own allies to achieve his objectives. The businessman-turned-politician leveraged the threat of tariffs to pressurise Mexico into strengthening its border patrol efforts to reduce illegal migrants crossing into the United States.

Similarly, Canada agreed to implement stricter border controls and measures against fentanyl after the US government initially imposed, then paused, a 25 per cent tariffs on its North American neighbour.

These allies are aware that the US drives the world economy, and while Canadian and Mexican governments may threaten counter-tariffs, it is their own economies that are likely to suffer.

Regardless of the arguments concerning the long-term implications of threatening close allies for short-term advantages, it is widely recognised that Tramp’s personality and his anti-establishment, “drain the swamp” rhetoric play a huge role in his appeal. Dubbed a populist, the outcome of the 2024 presidential election, in which he secured both, the Electoral College and the popular vote against Democrat Harris, indicates that a substantial portion of the US public sides with Trump’s tactics.

While discussions surrounding the US and Denmark continue, it is important to consider the perspective of Greenland itself. The country’s Prime Minister, Múte Egede, represents a left-leaning political party that advocates for the island’s independence from Denmark.

In response to Trump’s announcement regarding the potential acquisition of Greenland in December and the subsequent frenzy it generated, the Greenland prime minister expressed a willingness to engage with the US President, albeit on Greenland’s “own terms”.   

One could argue that the relatively small population of the Arctic island benefits significantly from the welfare provisions under the Danish law, including access to free healthcare–benefits  that may not be guaranteed under US governance.

Read more: Saudi FM’s statements reflect shifting policies towards Israel

However, given Greenland’s limited population and its vast natural resources, there exists the potential for persuasion among its citizens regarding future governance and economic opportunities.