This is Democracy – Episode 308: Greenland and the Arctic

This is Democracy,

a podcast about the people of the United States, a podcast about citizenship,

about engaging with politics and the world around

you. A podcast about educating yourself on today’s important issues and how to have a voice in what happens next.

Welcome to our latest episode of This Is Democracy.

Today we will be discussing an issue that has made global headlines in recent years, but often received little serious attention, at least in the us. Um, the, this is of course the island of Greenland and the increasingly important role of the Arctic and of Greenland in global politics and policy. Um, we have the privilege of being joined today by Dr.

Michela Olson. Uh. Dr. Olson is a senior researcher at the Danish Institute for International Studies. His research interests include NATO and transatlantic relations, the Arctic, the Nordic countries, Danish Foreign Policy, and Danish diplomatic history. His theoretical interests include realism, foreign policy analysis, and political psychology.

Dr. Olson, thank you so much for joining us today.

Thank you for having me.

Well, before we get started, um, we’d like to, uh, begin as always with a poem. This is an unusual poem. It’s taken from a, uh, video montage that was produced, uh, a couple years ago by a green, a Greenland native and a native of the Marshall Islands about, uh, the continuing impact of climate change on places like Greenland.

Um, those two authors are Kathy j Neal. Kina and AKA niana. It’s called Rise and this is an excerpt. I welcome you to Ali to New Knot, Greenland, the biggest island on earth, sister of ocean and sand. I hold these stones picked from the shores of Nuke, the foundation of the land. I call my home With these rocks, I bring a story told countless times a, a story about Ana, mother of the sea.

Who lives in a cave at the bottom of the ocean. This is a story about the guardian of the sea. She sees the greed in our hearts, the disrespect in our eyes. Every whale, every stream, every iceberg are her children. When we disrespect them, she gives us what we deserve. A lesson in respect. Do we deserve the melting ice, the hungry polar bears coming to our islands, or the colossal icebergs hitting these waters with rage?

Do we deserve their mother? Coming for our homes, for our lives. Well, Dr. Olson, um, I think a lot of, for a lot of Americans, the word Greenland conjures up images of polar bears or as in this poem of melting ice. Mm-hmm. Um, but there’s probably little understanding here of the history of Greenland and its current political situation.

Could you explain for us why Greenland, uh, finds itself a part of Denmark today?

Yes, certainly. Well. It goes back, uh, for over a thousand years basically. Uh, when Nors people, it was Eric the Red, uh, a Viking from Norway that, um, from, from from Iceland actually, uh, that, uh, he was banished from Iceland and had to go somewhere, and he went to Greenland, that he convinced a, a bunch of Icelanders to, to, to go to Greenland as well and start a nos.

Colony. Um, and, uh, they lived there for several hundred years. Uh, they may have had limited contact with the inwards that also were present in Greenland at various, uh, points in time. But then after, uh, several hundred years, they die out mysteriously. We don’t quite know why. And, uh, uh, then fast forward to, to the 18th century people in, in what is then Denmark, Norway.

Decide that. Well, this island, Greenland, it’s part of the realm. We haven’t heard from them in a long while. Uh, we better go have a look at what they’re doing, especially since, uh, at this point the reformation had happened in, uh, in Denmark and, and Norway. Uh, and there was this worry. Well, they are all Catholics up there, but when, uh, when hence either that was the priest that ended up going, when he arrives, he finds no.

People there anymore since they had all died out and F finds instead the inwards and decides to try to convert them to Christianity. And that sort of begins a colonial relationship between Denmark, uh, Norway and, uh, Greenland. That, uh, has been, that develops over the centuries. The Greenlanders, the Inuit, uh, they adopt Christianity gradually, uh, and uh, becomes part of first.

Denmark, Norway, and then when Denmark and Norway breaks up, they, they, they stay part of, of the kingdom of Denmark. And this relationship as most colonial relationships, it develops, uh, over time. And, uh, the way that, the direction that it goes is that, that, uh, the further up in history we become, we come, uh, the more independent.

Greenland becomes, and uh, the more self-determination Greenland acquires. And that sort of brings us to the state of affairs today between Denmark and Greenland. And right now the situation is thus that, um, by law. From 2009, um, it is clearly stipulated that Greenland has the right to go for independence, but in order to do so, Greenland will have to take care of, uh, all of its.

Its own affairs. And this has basically been sort of the, the, the big challenge in Danish green manic relations in recent times is that there’s no doubt that Greenland wants independence from Denmark. It’s simply a matter of being able to take care of, uh, uh, running a society on this immense island.

With a very small population. The commanders are only, uh, 56,000 people. So making that work without outside assistance is tough. And that has, uh, until now sort of been a main reason for why Denmark and Greenland are still together. And, uh, whether where that will end we’ll, we’ll, we will have to see. It’s, it’s very much still a developing story.

Thank you for that. Uh, we’re joined of course, as well by Professor Jeremy Zurich. Um, Jeremy, would you like to ask the next question

of Of course. Of course. And, um, much of what you just, uh, summarized so well, Mickel of course, is in the excellent article that you wrote for us that we published on our substack.

Uh, and one of the topics you also touched on in the article that I think we’d love to hear you talk more about is the way in which the United States, um, particularly during and after World War ii, uh, became. Involved in Greenland, especially for military affairs.

Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm. Certainly. Well, the, the way the US becomes involved in Greenland is, is in itself a, a fascinating story, and it begins with.

The occupation of Denmark by 19 Germany, uh, in 1940, and the the Danish ambassador, uh, to, to the US Henrik Kaufman. He, uh, is, is very appalled by the occupation and, uh, reacts in a fairly unusual way for a diplomat in that he goes to the US. And says that he would like the US to regard him as the true representative of a free Denmark, because Denmark has been occupied.

Right. And, uh, in order to sort of sweeten the deal, to convince the US that he should be the true representative of Denmark, he, uh, offers the US that if he is the true representative, he would have no problem allowing the US to have military bases in Greenland. Yeah. So this. Sort of kickstarts, uh, the US presence in Greenland.

The US had had a strategic interest in Greenland for a long time. Has con considered whether it would be possible to acquire Greenland before this time. But this is when the US becomes involved in Greenland for real. And then what happens? Greenland plays a, a fairly significant role in World War ii, uh, allowing for, uh, transport of troops, air aircraft, ships across the Atlantic, being sort of a stopping point.

It’s also important for, for weather, uh, predictions and uh, and that kind of thing. And so when it happens that World War II is over. Um, the, the, the mood in the US is that, well, these bases in Greenland, Kaufman had only promised them for the duration of the war, but these bases in Greenland are pretty handy.

Uh, and the US would like to keep them. So this is, uh, the position that the US takes Denmark, uh, and the US uh, is not able to sort of find a solution for this until Denmark and the US becomes allies in. NATO in 1949 and that leads to, to, to a treaty in 1951 where it sort of solidified that the US can have a military presence in agreement.

And it’s actually that treaty, that treaty from 19 50 51. It’s been modified since, but it’s, it’s pretty much still, uh, sort of the foundation of the US presence in Greenland even today.

Right. And one of the largest US air bases in the world, I think is, is still in Greenland. It used to be called thula Air Force Base.

I think it’s now called Pittu, if I’m not mistaken. Right?

That’s correct. Yeah. Yeah. It’s a, it’s an important part of, of. Of, of the US missile shield. Um, so, so, so, uh, it sort of goes to underline that, that, uh, Greenland still certainly has a, a, an important strategic importance for the US today.

Um, what is the sort of current, uh, political state of Greenland as we speak right now?

I know there has been, as I think you mentioned in your, your first answer, some discussion of Greenland independence and what that, what that would look like. Mm-hmm. Um, but as Greenland has made. You know, headlines in the United States and across the world. How have people in Greenland reacted? How is this, uh, how has this interacted or impacted the, the movement for independence in Greenland?

Well, I think, um, one thing that, that bears to mind is that, uh, if, if we’re, if you’re talking about also Donald Trump’s aspirations for acquiring the island, I think. First, I should mention, it’s not the first time that Donald Trump has tried this. Donald Trump tried to, to, to, to, to acquire Greenland back in 2019, and the answer back then was also a no.

Um, and, and this is not just a Danish answer. It’s most certainly also a green landing answer, and the Greenlandic, uh, answer is that Greenland wants to be independent of Denmark, but. Greenland does not want to simply switch out Denmark for the us. Greenland wants true independence. Um, and, and in in that, in that perspective, Donald Trump’s plans of, of, of the US swooping in and taking over, uh, has not, uh, had much traction on the Greenland side.

Yeah,

that makes sense. What larger American strategic interests besides, uh, these military bases lie in Greenland? Why has Greenland attracted the attention of President Trump, do you think?

Well, I think we can sort of talk about three main reasons. Uh, at least if we take what Donald Trump says, uh, seriously, then we can, we can say, well, there are the broader security, uh, interests.

I’ve touched on some of them already. It has to do with. The, the, the base already there, right? For, for, for, for, for tracking ballistic missiles. But it also has to do with, with the monitoring, uh, the skies for Russian fighter planes, stuff like that. It has to do with greenlea waters, uh, keeping track of.

Russian potentially missile nuclear armed, uh, submarines. So, so, so, so all of that, that’s sort of the core of the security argument that the us, uh, wants to keep track on, uh, primarily Russian activity and the Arctic, but also to an extent on possible Chinese, uh, act activity and the Arctic as well. Uh, so that’s the security one.

Then we have an economic interest, uh, now for Donald Trump that. Very much ties up to Greenland’s, vast mineral wealth, especially rare earth minerals, important for the tech industry. And, uh, this argument, um, well, the argument from Trump goes that, that, that the US needs to make sure that these resources are utilized for, for us purposes.

Basically, there is. One, uh, what should we say puzzling element to that argument? In, in insofar as from a green landing perspective? Uh, the, the Greenland have always way been fairly open or has long been fairly open to the fact that, that they want investments in these, uh, uh, kind of things. They want investments into resource extraction.

Uh, a very sort of common quote used here is that Greenland is open for business. Uh, so in that sense. There isn’t actually all that much that has prevented the US from, uh, coming in and opening mines and whatnot in Greenland. Uh, so one might ask, why hasn’t the US been, why haven’t. The US companies gone in and invested.

And that very much has to do with simply the business case, not always really being there. And um, therefore when we talk about Greenland, but actually when we talk about resource extraction from the Arctic in general, it’s very important to sort of. Separate. On the one hand, yes, there are a lot of resources in the Arctic, uh, but on the other hand, the cost for extracting those resources can also be very high.

That has to do with the harsh climate, great distances, the lack of infrastructure, all those kinds of things. So it’s not enough that there are a lot of mineral wealth. It also needs to be profitable, uh, to actually extract it. And that has been a problem, uh, in the Greenland case, uh, in particular. And then of course, we have reason number three, uh, which is this marga idea of making America greater.

This idea of. Territorial expansion for its own sake. Uh, and, and that of course is, is, is, is, uh, speaking sort of from a Danish perspective, that’s, that’s harder to really, uh, really say that much about. Other than that, the Danish government does not like that, right? That, that Trump seeks territorial expansion or in the kingdom of them.

Uh, Michel, uh, uh, of course, uh, this discussion of Greenland is occurring within a larger Arctic space, uh, one of the regions of the world that’s transforming before our eyes. Uh, because of climate change, um, there are many countries interested in this region beyond Denmark and the United States, of course, uh, Norway, Russia, China, um.

How, how does the dispute, if we might call it that over a Greenland fit into at least the larger geopolitical vision for the Arctic that Denmark has?

Well, it, it fits very poorly into that, uh, perspective, right? Uh, it’s that the basic up, up until. Roughly five, 10 years ago. Uh, the, the, the, the, the, there were the Danish anchoring, landing Arctic strategy was one where, uh, it was hoped that the region could be kept free of, uh, international conflict.

There was this idea of Arctic exceptionalism that it was possible to cooperate in the Arctic, even amongst actors that. Was not normally able to cooperate. And that was primarily between Russia and the West. But that began to break down, uh, gradually, uh, already, uh, with the first Ukraine crisis back in 2014.

And then when we get to 2019, uh, we’re sort of at the point where. Great power tension when the Arctic was so great that this idea that the Arctic was a special place had to be laid to rest, unfortunately. Uh, but what sort of characterized that period and up till today was of course that, that, uh, Denmark always saw this rising conflict as one between, uh, the US.

And the West on the one side and then uh, Russia and possibly China on the other. I think it was most certainly a great surprise to, to both, uh, Denmark and Greenland to have to look at the US in an adversarial perspective. I mean, the US have have been the cornerstone of Danish foreign security policy for 75 years, so, so.

Um, uh, having that destabilized and in such a manner, uh, I was probably a fairly shocking thing for, for Danish politicians this year.

What do you think this history, particularly the history of Danish involvement in Greenland and American involvement in Greenland can say about the future of conflict in competition in the Arctic, especially as, as climate change seems to, uh, open up to more possibilities in the Arctic?

Well, I think it’s, it’s, it’s, it’s made. Uh, conflict scenarios in the Arctic vastly more complicated because, uh, as I said, we usually, we thought about the possibility of conflict in the Arctic, sort of in a, in a fairly narrow is the West versus Russia or the West versus Russia and China kind of perspective.

But now this, uh, division within the west that this has caused, because let’s face it, it’s not just about. Denmark and Greenland. It’s also about, I think the rest of the Western Arctic countries being a little bit worried about what it means for them that the US has taken this position. Um, it it, it definitely changes this fairly unified western, uh, position in the Arctic that I think, uh, uh, you could often find in, uh, just, just a year ago.

So, so, so that thing, it, it makes it much more complicated to predict what’s going to happen.

And, and how do you think, uh, we should think of Greenland, particularly when it comes to climate change? I think, um, I mean we began with a poem about, uh, rising sea levels and melting ice in Greenland. Uh, and it seems like this is part of the, part of the reason that strategic interests in Greenland have come to the fore.

Um, what, what role, if any, do you think that this plays in the, in the strategic calculation?

Well, I think I, I think climate change plays multiple roles when it comes to the Arctic and when it comes to Greenland. Uh, on the one hand, uh, Greenland and the Arctic is sort of the canary in the coal mine. Uh, global warming is happening faster in the Arctic, and it’s happening faster in Greenland than elsewhere.

Uh, and it’s sort of a for warning as to what’s in store for the, for the, for, for the rest of the world. Uh, with, with, with climate change on the other hand. Climate change the way it hits in the Arctic and in Greenland in particular, there are damaging effects to be sure. I mean, uh, once, uh, it can be damaging to infrastructure, that, that, that, that uh, uh, places that used to be frozen all year round all of a sudden melts.

It can destabilize for sure, but. That there are also new economic opportunities, uh, in the case of Greenland because as I said, one of the main, uh, limitations for resource extraction in, in Greenland is the harsh climate. So to the extent that that climate becomes, uh, uh, more accessible. That can give new economic opportunities, uh, for Greenland.

Also, in terms of fishing, we see that as the climate changes, uh, some fish stocks, uh, migrate north. And, uh, for, for some stocks, uh, that means migrating into Greenland waters. So, so, so Greenland is in the curious position of. Also receiving some of the benefits of global warming while at the same time, which we say the tra traditional Greenland approach to nature.

And, and, and, and the region would be one, as you described in the po uh, poem of one of preservation. Right? Uh, so, so, so there’s a tension there that. Greenland is seeking economic development and for that reason has an interest in trying to get these resource extraction projects up and running. And at the same time, uh, Greenlanders also want to protect their pristine environment.

And one of the places you’ve seen this tension play out is, is, uh, in the. Benefil project. It’s, it’s, it’s a big project in Greenland where, where there was hope to form to, to, to extract, uh, rare earth minerals. Uh, but where the Greenland, uh, where Grand Greenland politicians have, have recently, uh, put. A stop to the project Exactly.

Because of environmental concerns and concerns of of, of the citizens that are nearby the project. So, so, so, so it’s always there that tension. Uh, the wish to preserve the environment and the wish for economic development.

Uh, mic. What about other actors in the region? We’ve talked a lot about the United States and Denmark and the Greenlandic population.

But what about Canada, uh, Norway, Russia, uh, what have their, uh, actions been surrounding Greenland and around larger arctic security issues? In recent mm-hmm. Recent weeks and years? I know this is a topic actually, you’ve spent a lot of time studying. Sure.

So, I mean, if we, if we just cover Canada and Norway first, I think, um.

Uh, Denmark currently has a, has a bit of a, of, of a common relationship with, with Canada in, in, in, in, in facing some of the same challenges from the Trump administration, uh, the Trump administration wanting to, to add Canada as the 51st state A. But, uh, beyond that even, I mean, both Canada and and Norway would be sympathetic to, to, to, to Denmark and Greenland, having the, the, to decide this matter on their own.

Um. When it comes to sort of larger security issues, these countries have also generally been able to, to, to, to find fairly common footing. Um, and then that, that brings us to Russia, which is, uh, what should we say? The, the, uh, the Arctic actor that, uh, uh, Denmark used to focus most of its Arctic policies, uh, to deal with.

Right. Uh, because, um. Russia for Russia, the Arctic is of paramount importance. Um, and there are several reasons. First of all, we have the strategic regions, um, and they, they mirror the us. To an extent for Russia. Uh, one of the most important parts of, uh, Russian strategic deterrent is, uh, uh, its, uh, nuclear armed submarines with the its Northern fleet, um, which is, uh, located at the mask, uh, uh, peninsula, uh, in the Arctic.

Uh, and so for Russia, uh, safeguarding those nuclear armed submarines and making sure that those submarines can make their way to the us uh, to threaten retaliation is a, a key component in, in Russia nuclear strategy basically. Uh, so, so, so for that reason, the Arctic is very important for Russia from a security perspective.

Uh, then in economic terms. The Arctic is of significant importance because the Russian economy is very much bound up on oil and gas now. Uh, up until now most of that oil and gas has, has come from, has been land-based, and it’s come from Siberia, uh, among other places. But as those, uh, sources of wealth begin to run dry, uh, we’ve seen the Russians increasingly be interested in moving to.

Offshore, uh, in the Arctic region to, to try to, to to, to uh, uh, set up new avenues of, of, of, of, uh, revenue for the Russian State. Um, so, so, so in that sense, that has had a, a sort of multifaceted effect on the Arctic region in security terms, because. Originally that actually was a, what should we say, quote unquote, a good thing for arctic security because that meant that the Russians, they were very motivated by, by the wish for economic gains in the Arctic, and especially in the parts of the Arctic that was established to be Russian.

Um, and therefore they, they actually for a long time played quite nice in the Arctic in terms of trying to avoid. Conflict exactly, because they wanted, uh, to, to, to, to get started with those resource extraction projects. Now that situation has changed somewhat, uh, cooperation between Russia and the West on, on extracting oil and gas from, from the Russian Arctic has stopped and now the Russians are, are cooperating much more with Chinese, uh, on this.

So, so, uh. Yeah. Uh, and in this situation you can see Greenland at the US temperate Greenland is, is, is, is a bit of a weird factor also for Russian approach to the Arctic. We’ve seen, on the one hand, we’ve seen sort of mixed, uh, uh, messaging from the Russians. We’ve seen, uh, uh, the Russian ambassador without, uh, uh, denouncing that, that the US should, should do something like that and Greenland.

But then, then more recently, uh. Uh, Vladimir Putin, the Russian president has, has, has, uh, sort of opened up that maybe Russia would be okay with, with allowing the US a free hand in Greenland, sort of with the not so subtle, uh, messaging that perhaps Russia could then get the same kind of free hand in Ukraine.

So, so there are many factors at play here, for sure.

And with regard to Russia, um, I, I know, uh, just in the last uh, weeks, there have been Russian, uh, attacks, um, including, uh, one on the Copenhagen Airport. Mm-hmm. Um, do, does Denmark perceive, uh, a pattern of Russian aggression? Um mm-hmm with regard to this region?

Well, I think now the recent grown, uh, operations in, in Danish airspace, that was in, that was in, uh, in, in, in, uh, Denmark proper, uh, Copenhagen Airport, as you mentioned. Right. And I think, I don’t think that was particularly Arctic focused. I think that was, uh, if it was an answer to any. Danish policies, uh, I would say was more likely a response to a Danish decision made a few weeks ago to begin to invest in long range precision weapons.

Uh, which from a Russian perspective, uh, was seen to be directed, could be directed only to towards them. Right. And then we shouldn’t, uh, it should also be seen as sort of a part of a general. Pattern of Russia testing the NATO countries, uh, in these weeks, uh, in terms of finding a, a gap in, in NATO defenses.

So, so, so I don’t see it so much in Arctic terms also because, um, I don’t think that that Danish or Green Atlantic politicians are especially worried about a, what you say, a Russian invasion of Greenland. It’s not quite, um, it’s not quite that when we think of Russia. In the Arctic and as a sort of, as a threat relations to Greenland, it would actually more be, uh, uh, in terms of a threat to the US because of this, uh, simple geographic fact that, that for, for Russian submarines and, and, and aircraft to, to pass from Russia to the United States, one of the fastest ways to get.

Get there is, is through the Arctic and through through Greenland, territorial waters and, uh, over Greenland if you’re flying. Right? So in, so in that sense, I don’t think that, that we sort of see, uh, Russia as a direct threat to Greenland right now. Uh, but we see that Russia can become a threat to, to, to, to the US and use Greenland territory for that.

Well, Dr. Olson, you’ve provided us with a sort of wonderful. History, uh, of, of Greenland’s Place in the Arctic, and then brought us down to the very important strategic considerations today. But to close, I want to ask a very different question. Um, for those of our listeners, maybe who, um, have heard, uh, and, uh, the, the, the way that Greenland has been discussed in the news, um, by the president of the United States or in these sort of strategic, uh, economic ways, um, how can they, if they wanna relate.

To Greenland and to the people of Greenland, uh, in a different way. How can, what, what do you think that can look like? How do you recommend they get involved or learn more about this topic?

Well, I think, um, I think what really is the issue here is, is what does the Greenlanders want? Right. Uh, the, the age of colonialism ought to be over.

Uh, and in that sense, this should be a matter of helping the green vendors achieve, uh, what they wanna achieve. Right? And, uh, I think, uh, what we’ve seen from, from Donald Trump in, in recent months is not that what can. The US population do well, arguably, I, I would actually say that the US population, or at least a subset of them that has participated in, in, in, in a, in certain polls have actually already, uh, served a, a, a very constructive purpose because I, my, my, uh, uh, sort of, uh, greatest, uh, re uh, reassurance in, in, in terms of the US not invading agreement is actually that the US population has.

Uh, said, or polls, uh, conducted, uh, in the US population, I’m very clear that this would not be something that the American people want. Uh, so, so that fills me with, with, with a certain amount of hope at, at the very least.

Wonderful. Well, thank you so much for joining us, Dr. Ul Olson. Uh, and thank you Jeremy for joining us as well. This has been a wonderful. New episode of This Is Democracy.

This podcast is produced by the Liberal Arts ITS Development Studio

and the College of Liberal Arts at the University of Texas at Austin.

The music in this episode was written and recorded by Scott Holmes. Stay tuned for a new episode every week You can find this is Democracy on Apple Podcast, Spotify and YouTube.

See you next time.