Greenland’s prime minister says move is ‘demonstration of power’ and accuses US of interfering in its political affairs

Summary

Greenland’s prime minister, Múte B Egede, condemned the planned visit by Usha Vance, Mike Waltz, and US Energy Secretary Chris Wright, calling it “foreign interference” and urging international support against American pressure.

The visit, seen as a charm offensive amid ongoing coalition talks, sparked local outrage, with Jens-Frederik Nielsen, leader of Greenland’s Democrats, criticizing the US for disrespecting Greenland’s sovereignty.

Denmark’s Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen emphasized cooperation with the US based on respect for sovereignty.

Extra Danish police have been deployed to Greenland ahead of the visit.

  • cosmicrookie@lemmy.worldEnglish
    15·
    4 days ago

    The USA has had free access to build military bases on Greenland since the early 50s without even telling Denmark. This is the issue at the moment, as Denmark or Greenland, can’t forbid them from traveling to their own bases

    Article 5, paragraph 3, guaranteed the US and its troops unrestricted freedom of operation between these bases, on land, air, and sea, throughout the entire national territory. Article 6 obliged the US “to show due respect for all regulations and customs affecting the population and the administration of Greenland”

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_in_Greenland

    • pmtriste@lemmy.worldEnglish
      8·
      4 days ago

      The United States recently violated article 6 then, given that they don’t seem to respect regulations and customs affecting the administration of Greenland.

      • cosmicrookie@lemmy.worldEnglish
        4·
        4 days ago

        I hope that this can be a point to make. Also talks are to require USA to be part of NATO in order to keep their presence there. Greenland is a very powerful hand for NATO to play against USA because it is basically one of two backdoors of USA, and the shortest distance for the Russians to access it. Alaska is the other one.

    • Hikuro-93@lemmy.caEnglish
      9·
      4 days ago

      That’s sad to hear. Well, alternatively, when conditions like these get in the way malicious compliance tends to be the answer. Let them go, but they shouldn’t be surprised that the people don’t welcome them and make them feel as unwanted as possible.

      All this while we (allies) start paving the long, bureocratic and legal way to defend ourselves, by rethinking and adjusting these same accords and treaties that prove themselves to be liabilities in these circumstances. They’re there to protect stability and balance, after all, not to excuse bullies wanting to impose themselves on other nations.

      • cosmicrookie@lemmy.worldEnglish
        4·
        4 days ago

        Agreed

        Trump is giving the rest of the world the right cards to strengthen their future ties to USA but also to close any backdoors that no one would have imagined when the standing agreements were made

    • Auli@lemmy.caEnglish
      4·
      4 days ago

      Except America seems to have violated their part of the agreement. So why should they still uphold it. Every country should get American bases out of their country.