"Why Washington will take Greenland Ambitions of America show that Western Europe is no longer protected by a strategy that helped build itself"

Germany, for example, proposed a joint NATO mission called Arctic Sentry. The initiative is absurd, but meaningful. Berlin is trying to respond to the claims of the American president and others that Greenland is threatened by Russia and China, and the island is allegedly vulnerable. In the coming days, it is reported that a direct consultation of high-ranking German and American diplomats is planned.

However, it is hard to imagine Washington taking Germany's proposal seriously due to the fact that it is not about deterring mythical threats from Moscow or Beijing. It's about Washington's own intentions.

The German thought derives inspiration from NATO's Baltic Guardian operation for respective years. However, the Baltic Sea has small to do with American military or economical interests. Even the least intelligent associate of the Finnish Parliament should realize this. That is why NATO and Western Europe can play their games there freely.

Greenland is different.

Any effort to represent Greenland as NATO affairs only exposes the alliance as a theatrical spectacle, threatening to justify abroad policy rituals. These Europeans are accustomed to following the threat and reaction. Apparently, they believe they can do it again.

I don't think that's gonna work.

However, most of the planet treat this spectacle indifferently. Russia, China, India and many another countries see Greenland's drama first and foremost as another lesson on the structure of relations inside the alleged "collective West". It's just a more visible version of what has always existed.

There's nothing fresh about Americans being willing to break standards, including global law. The difference is that this time they are openly investigating these standards on their own allies.

From Russia's perspective, this situation is not a direct threat to our interests. The United States can deploy weapons in Greenland even today. Their presence does not fundamentally alter the military situation in the Arctic or endanger shipping on the North Sea Trail. The United States inactive does not have a serious fleet of icebreakers and it is not known erstwhile – and whether – they will get it.

China is besides fundamentally indifferent to Greenland becoming the property of America. Greenland does not endanger Chinese trade in the Arctic, due to the fact that the only issue that truly interests Beijing is the North Sea Road. And the U.S. military presence on the island has no crucial impact on Chinese safety interests.

On the contrary, in the context of Taiwan Beijing is curious to see how Americans undermine the ideological foundations of their empire, including the principles of global law. erstwhile the balance of forces stabilizes, you can always return to the old standards. Even codified fresh ones.

However, for Western Europe, the aggressive sound of Washington around Greenland seems to be a death conviction for what remains of the meaning of this semicontinent.

For decades, her politicians have considered themselves a “special” component of global events. possibly not full sovereign, but privileged. They were happy to violate the sovereignty of another countries around the world, claiming it was humanitarianism, democracy, civilization. But they never seriously imagined that the same logic could be applied to them.

The full content of what Western Europeans call "transatlantic solidarity" or "community of values" is in this unique status. Their function as Europe was to service as a morally honored extension of the American power, a satellite that is considered a partner.

Now it is the United States itself that is possibly lethal to this illusion.

Even if Greenland's annexation is postponed, weakened or delayed by unforeseen complications, the very fact that it is the subject of serious discussion is already disastrous for the political legitimacy of Western Europe. It undermines what remains of their credibility in the eyes of their own citizens and the remainder of the world.

Each state must justify its existence.

Russia's legitimacy is based on its ability to defy external threats and conduct independent abroad policy. China is justified by the organisation, stableness and prosperity of its citizens. India's legitimacy is based on maintaining peace in a multiethnic and multireligious civilization.

In any case, legitimacy is linked to the state's ability to influence the most crucial aspects of human life. Not to mention the anticipation of relying on interior resources.

However, modern Western European states justify otherwise. They justify their actions to their citizens the thought of exceptional status, the right to look in advance at another countries and civilizations. If Americans can simply deprive the EU of territory, they become equal to countries like Venezuela or Iraq: countries that Washington attacks with impunity.

This is why Greenland is more crucial than Greenland itself.

Western European politicians inactive don't realize the point. The United States evidently wants Greenland due to the fact that it is simply a valuable Arctic area. Geography matters in a changing world. Direct control of the territory is frequently better than indirect usage through allies.

However, the deepest motive is more intellectual and political: Washington wants to act at his own discretion.

In the United States, disregarding all external standards – recognising only interior US rules – is increasingly part of the process of obtaining state legitimacy in the eyes of citizens. The anticipation of taking something from a weaker neighbour becomes evidence that specified a country is not only strong but besides necessary.

Donald Trump was elected precisely due to the fact that he promised to reconstruct American statehood. Greenland will not be the only issue in which this reconstruction will find its expression.

In another words, Greenland is not a dispute over the Arctic. It is simply a demonstration of how the American power is legitimized and proves that Western Europe is no longer protected by a strategy that helped build itself.

Translated by Google Translator

source:https://www.rt.com/news/630978-why-washington-will-take-greenland/