Trump is not bluffing about Greenland and here’s why

Trump is not bluffing about Greenland and here’s why

RT

When US President Donald Trump returned to the topic of acquiring Greenland – one that seemed largely forgotten just a month ago – the idea wasn’t considered mere ‘theatrics’, particularly in Europe. And it’s not just about the ‘Maduro effect’. Beneath Trump’s provocative statements, a clear geopolitical strategy is emerging, one that can be termed ‘new globalism’. This approach is far more economically grounded than the concept of globalization, even US-centric globalization.  

Trump’s ‘new globalism’ consists of three logically interconnected components:

• Reinterpreting the Monroe Doctrine (One may wonder if Trump considers the Philippines part of this ‘Greater America’ as well...)

• Transforming the US into an energy superpower that monopolizes the rules of the game in the hydrocarbon market, particularly in regional trade

• Enhancing America’s status as an Arctic superpower – a position that the US currently holds only nominally 

  
  

  Trump’s actions are quite logical: dismantling Nicolas Maduro’s regime is crucial for turning Latin America’s resources into a source of short-term economic stability for the US. This is Trump’s ‘entrance ticket’ into the world of ‘new globalism’. 

   America cannot become an energy superpower unless it has control over Venezuela’s (and eventually Brazil’s and Iran’s) oil resources and eliminates ‘shadow fleets’ as soon as possible. Similarly, achieving full legal control over Greenland is essential for establishing the US as an Arctic power. Otherwise, it would be difficult for the US to maintain competitiveness as an energy superpower after 2030.

  Certainly, an evolutionary path could involve investing in a costly and prolonged program to revive Alaska. However, that would take years, if not decades. Instead, Greenland presents an opportunity to quickly solidify a new political and geographical status.

  Trump acts systematically, choosing his next steps based on the perceived weaknesses of his geopolitical competitors. Apparently, he believes that Europe is sufficiently weakened to engage in discussions about Greenland’s status at a completely different level than in the spring of 2025, when he had to back down.

  We should also note that when discussing Greenland, Trump directly highlighted NATO’s inability to protect the island from external threats, even fabricated ones (like the prospect of Russia and China seizing the territory). Trump’s message is clear: he intends to reclaim any poorly defended ‘assets’.