The new agreement between the United States, Denmark and Greenland on the security of the Danish autonomous territory appears to be good news.
asserted
agreement → appear → territory
It may finally put an end to nearly two years of repeated intimidation of Greenlanders by Washington and ensure that the stated red lines on territorial integrity and sovereignty are not crossed.
uncertain
lines → put → integrity
We still do not know exactly what the agreement contains, but the emerging picture is close to a best-case scenario for Denmark and Greenland.
asserted
picture → know → Denmark
The dispute appears to have been moved back onto the diplomatic playing field, where questions of international law, investment and security policy can be handled.
asserted
questions → appear → law
At the same time, US President Donald Trump can present himself as a winner to his supporters, which was necessary to de-escalate tensions.
asserted
which → present → tensions
His political allies and aligned media outlets are already praising his negotiating strategy, arguing that sustained pressure worked and left the US better placed to expand its military presence in Greenland — an area that is, admittedly, vital to US national security.
asserted
that → align → security
But there is a catch: much of this was already possible under the existing 1951 defence agreement, which was updated in 2004 with Greenland’s Home Rule Government as a party.
asserted
which → be → party
It gave the US extensive military rights, which Washington made considerable use of during the Cold War, when it maintained 17 military installations and more than 10,000 personnel in Greenland.
asserted
it → give → Greenland
Today, only Pituffik Space Base remains, with about 150 US military personnel.
asserted
Base → remain → personnel
There may be at least two changes introduced by the new agreement, if we are to take at face value Trump’s statement posted on Truth Social on September 19.
uncertain
we → introduce → September
First, the US president wrote that the deal is an “‘Infinite Life’ Agreement, there is no end!”
asserted
deal → write → ?
By comparison, the original agreement stated that it “shall remain in effect for the duration of the North Atlantic Treaty”.
asserted
it → state → Treaty
In other words, it was tied to NATO’s continued existence.
asserted
it → tie → existence
The new agreement may not be, which could be seen as a consequence of Trump’s limited commitment to NATO and his persistent insistence on “America First”.
uncertain
which → see → America
Second, the US president wrote: “No U.S. adversary can EVER have a base in Greenland, have a military presence in Greenland, or make sensitive investments in Greenland without our express written approval.”
asserted
adversary → write → approval
In other words, the US would appear to have gained a formal veto power that could block adversarial countries – such as Russia and China – from seeking to establish a foothold in Greenland.
uncertain
that → appear → Greenland
Examples from recent years suggest, however, that this was already largely the case in practice.
asserted
this → suggest → practice
The Danish government has intervened at least twice in cases involving Chinese interests in Greenland, where US security concerns were also at stake: in 2016, when a Chinese company showed interest in buying a decommissioned naval station at Kangilinnguit in southern Greenland, and two years later, when a Chinese construction company sought to take part in Greenland’s major airport project.
asserted
company → intervene → project
Both were prevented.
asserted
Both → prevent → ?
With the new agreement in place, it appears that Danish intervention may no longer be formally necessary.
uncertain
intervention → appear → place
If this interpretation holds, the US has indeed increased its control over Greenland – on paper.
asserted
US → hold → paper
In practice, the change appears to be relatively limited, which would be a testament to the negotiating skills of the Danish and Greenlandic representatives in the high-level working group.
asserted
which → appear → group
They have given Trump the opportunity to claim the victory he needed, while preserving sovereignty.
uncertain
he → give → sovereignty
One sentence in Trump’s statement, however, should give us pause: “There will be NO COST to the United States”, he wrote.
asserted
he → give → States
That is a rather remarkable piece of arithmetic, and one unlikely to reassure Danish taxpayers if it turns out to be true.
asserted
it → reassure → taxpayers
Still, we should remember that Mexico did not end up paying for the wall along its border with the US, and it remains to be seen whether Americans will receive the $5,000 Trump has promised if Republicans retain control of Congress in the midterm elections.
asserted
Republicans → remember → elections
We should also consider that Greenland could derive greater economic benefit from an expanded US military presence.
uncertain
Greenland → consider → presence
We can make a final pronouncement on the agreement only when we know in full what it actually says.
asserted
it → make → what
The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera’s editorial stance.
asserted
views → express → stance
The Aporia
