Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Canada and Greenland together. It could work. By Eric Hensal, who gave me permission to post.
Progressive conjectures on what to do next.Canada and Greenland together. It could work.
If nothing else, it would be a legendary troll of Trump
Eric Hensal
Mar 27
J.D. Vance now joins his wife for the Greenland visit, likely in penance for his disparaging remarks on Trump’s lack of understanding exposed in Signalgate. Vance will affirm his loyalty in a public display of demanding Greenland, while safely ensconced from protesters at Pituffik Space Base [insert your joke here, too many for me to pick from]. And, while neither Canadian or a Greenlander, I am American enough to presume my suggestion regarding your shared Trump problems is worth consideration. So here goes.
Problems in simple terms
Greenland wants independence. Understandable. Not much in common with Denmark, after all. Independence is a big lift though: currency, defense, trade and the like. Many Greenlanders have given much thought to independence and I would not pretend to be expert. But independence is a complicated matter for any state starting out in the 21st century.—lots of paperwork and, for Greenland, a belligerent Donald J. Trump.
Canada would prefer a stronger position in the arctic and not being buttressed on either side by Alaska and a Trumpian Greenland with its attendant difficulty negotiating the drill baby drill economic zones Trump would demand in the Baffin Bay or some other alarming location.
Consider this, Greenland and Canada. You share a long common border. Inuit Canadians in the Nunavut Territory are practically cousins with Inuit Greenlanders. There is a common interest in keeping the arctic, well, arctic, with a shared concern about global warming. You two should get together and talk. At the very least, that conversation would drive Trump crazy. At best, you find solid working relationship moving forward—with the added kicker of driving Trump crazy.
Canada as self-defense from the USA
Canada, in its modern form, was born as much from concerns over a United States invasion during the Civil War era as anything else. The U.S. did invade Canada in the Revolutionary War and the War of 1812, so worry was not far-fetched. The U.S. did have a huge, well-equipped standing army and was unhappy Great Britain did not jump on the Union bandwagon right away with its neutrality. Lincoln’s Secretary of State William Seward had dreamed of grabbing the country. U.S. papers at the time openly talked about invasion. Canada saw transitioning from a tempting British overseas colony to be taken into a sovereign federation as a political and diplomatic defense against U.S. northward expansionism.
This is relevant to Greenland because in unity there is strength and a preservation of identity in the modern Canadian experience. Canadian provinces are independent of each other and the federal government in ways no U.S. state could be. Provinces can even levy their own tariffs on U.S. goods, something impossible for a state. Even immigration is tied to provincial policies. Quebec has the French language and even its own legal system. And, the aforementioned Nunavut, while a territory and not a province, is a place in Canada with a tremendous connection to the people and language of Greenland. Greenland could have the self-determination it desires while joining a well-established polity and economy, with NATO protections as well. Newfoundland joined Canada in 1949, so such an addition has happened in recent times.
Strength in numbers
In short, an independent Greenland is way more tempting for the U.S. under Trump than a Greenland Province of Canada. And there is more than enough connection between the two countries to make such a union plausible. This plausibility leads me to suggest that a serious delegation of Canadians meet with leaders in Greenland to discuss the idea. If nothing else, it would be a trolling of legend.
Close your eyes and imagine the scene. Trump wants Greenland. Trump wants Canada. Both of you get together and plan to keep Trump from having either. All those pictures of smiling Canadians and Greenlanders shaking hands and signing, well, anything, would make Trump’s hair spontaneously combust. Just agree to a committee to establish a working group that will outline possible structures for a commission to study admission to Canada and Trump would melt down in real time on his Truth Social.
Such a meeting would make a point to the world by standing up to Trump while having a spot of fun along the way. And talking might generate interesting ideas for the future that may grow in importance over time, as Trump eventually fades away.
Problems in simple terms
Greenland wants independence. Understandable. Not much in common with Denmark, after all. Independence is a big lift though: currency, defense, trade and the like. Many Greenlanders have given much thought to independence and I would not pretend to be expert. But independence is a complicated matter for any state starting out in the 21st century.—lots of paperwork and, for Greenland, a belligerent Donald J. Trump.
Canada would prefer a stronger position in the arctic and not being buttressed on either side by Alaska and a Trumpian Greenland with its attendant difficulty negotiating the drill baby drill economic zones Trump would demand in the Baffin Bay or some other alarming location.
Consider this, Greenland and Canada. You share a long common border. Inuit Canadians in the Nunavut Territory are practically cousins with Inuit Greenlanders. There is a common interest in keeping the arctic, well, arctic, with a shared concern about global warming. You two should get together and talk. At the very least, that conversation would drive Trump crazy. At best, you find solid working relationship moving forward—with the added kicker of driving Trump crazy.
Canada as self-defense from the USA
Canada, in its modern form, was born as much from concerns over a United States invasion during the Civil War era as anything else. The U.S. did invade Canada in the Revolutionary War and the War of 1812, so worry was not far-fetched. The U.S. did have a huge, well-equipped standing army and was unhappy Great Britain did not jump on the Union bandwagon right away with its neutrality. Lincoln’s Secretary of State William Seward had dreamed of grabbing the country. U.S. papers at the time openly talked about invasion. Canada saw transitioning from a tempting British overseas colony to be taken into a sovereign federation as a political and diplomatic defense against U.S. northward expansionism.
This is relevant to Greenland because in unity there is strength and a preservation of identity in the modern Canadian experience. Canadian provinces are independent of each other and the federal government in ways no U.S. state could be. Provinces can even levy their own tariffs on U.S. goods, something impossible for a state. Even immigration is tied to provincial policies. Quebec has the French language and even its own legal system. And, the aforementioned Nunavut, while a territory and not a province, is a place in Canada with a tremendous connection to the people and language of Greenland. Greenland could have the self-determination it desires while joining a well-established polity and economy, with NATO protections as well. Newfoundland joined Canada in 1949, so such an addition has happened in recent times.
Strength in numbers
In short, an independent Greenland is way more tempting for the U.S. under Trump than a Greenland Province of Canada. And there is more than enough connection between the two countries to make such a union plausible. This plausibility leads me to suggest that a serious delegation of Canadians meet with leaders in Greenland to discuss the idea. If nothing else, it would be a trolling of legend.
Close your eyes and imagine the scene. Trump wants Greenland. Trump wants Canada. Both of you get together and plan to keep Trump from having either. All those pictures of smiling Canadians and Greenlanders shaking hands and signing, well, anything, would make Trump’s hair spontaneously combust. Just agree to a committee to establish a working group that will outline possible structures for a commission to study admission to Canada and Trump would melt down in real time on his Truth Social.
Such a meeting would make a point to the world by standing up to Trump while having a spot of fun along the way. And talking might generate interesting ideas for the future that may grow in importance over time, as Trump eventually fades away.
18 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
= new reply since forum marked as read
EPIC!!!
Highly dubious. For one, if Greenlanders want to split from Denmark, why would they want to join with Canada?
As well, Canada has more than enough to defend and govern its own North let alone take on a vast additional frozen, sparsely populated territory that isn't even connected by land to Canada.
That said, I do wish folks would stop this aggravating musing and speculation about one country taking over another. We even had a DU post today going on about what would happen militarily if the US launched an armed invasion. Imperialism is an ugly thing no matter what the context...
Eric is a personal friend of mine so I have other ways of reaching him. I will see if he can do this.
He will respond and when he does, I will come back with a link, I hope!