With the avalanche of “hardcore’ substantive items flooding the news cycle in recent days—from the hostage releases to Donald Trump’s proposal to relocate the Gazan public– some might find it a little frivolous to focus attention on something seeming as remote as the icy expanses of Greenland.
Greenland: The tip of an iceberg?
However, recently this massive, frigid, and largely barren island, stretching over an area considerably larger than Texas, California. Montana, and Arizona combined) has found itself thrust abruptly into the global media, with Donald Trump’s renewing his call to initiate measures to bring the territory under US jurisdiction. Indeed, this is not the first time Trump has broached the issue of US governance of Greenland, originally raising it in 2019. This time, however, the proposal catapulted the remote Artic island, rarely an item of intense media interest to the epicentre of attention for many international news outlets including, BBC, Financial Times, Newsmax, Reuters FoxNews Politico, Guardian, CNN to mention but a few.
Quite apart from the feasibility (or lack thereof) of the US administration’s proclaimed aim , the reaction to the initiative of certain countries was revealing as to the make-up of their underlying political psyche—particularly France, under the wobbly Macron government.
Paris’s petulant pique?
Indeed, over the past year, I have on several occasions, commented on the aberrant conduct of Paris and its often perplexing and perturbing policy quirks. These eyebrow-raising “antics” reach back half a decade to reports of sinister business machinations between Macron-affiliated plutocrats and the leadership of the Hezbollah terrorist group.
France also displayed a burst of petulant pique against Israel, whose companies it barred from participating in prestigious arms exhibitions on its soil, while, almost inconceivably, allowing over 200 French companies to take part—despite them being known to be licensed suppliers of Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC). Perhaps even more infuriatingly, some of the Iranian companies, with which these French firms were doing business, were under U.S.-imposed sanctions!
Indeed, a glimpse of “Macronese” antisemitic bile emerged last year, when at a conference to rally support for adversaries of the Jewish state, the French president perversely accused Israel of “sowing barbarism” in its attempt to rebuff the naked and unprovoked barbarism of its brutal terroristic attackers.
France flailing & floundering
The French response to the Trump proposal regarding the possible American acquisition of Greenland is perhaps instructive as to the disarray afflicting the conduct of Paris’s policy on the global stage.
|For, although the suggestion was roundly rejected by both Demark (to whom Greenland currently belongs) and its European allies as unacceptable, the French response was a classic example of hyperbolic overreach. Thus, on January 28, French foreign minister Jean-Noël Barrot stated that Paris had “started discussing” with Copenhagen the possibility of deploying troops to the Danish territory in reaction to Trump’s declared intent. The absurdity of the stand taken by the French quickly became apparent, when Barrot was immediately forced to concede that this was “ not Denmark’s wish”.
Indeed, scorn was soon heaped on France’s reference to military action. One seasoned academic excoriated the suggestion as “pure escalation” from France, urging not to “throw fuel on the fire.” Another dismissed “Sending Troops to Greenland” as “Macron’s Latest Stunt”, derisively pointing out that Barrot’s later acknowledgement “that he doesn’t believe the U.S. will invade Greenland…shows that comments from French officials amount to little more than rhetorical grandstanding…”
You can’t make this up!
Of course, the major thrust of Trump’s idea was not to take Greenland by force of arms but to procure it by purchasing it—arguably along the lines that the US purchased Alaska (the largest state in the Union) from Russia in the mid-19th century.
So to sum up, the French proposal was (a) to potentially pit NATO troops against NATO troops; (b) to contend with a threat that the US never really made; and (c) by means which Denmark rejected.
This is so nonsensical that it would be hards to make up anything more risible!
Indeed, it is somewhat difficult to fathom why France should display such indignant ire at the Trump proposal. After all, the possible purchase of Greenland is hardly new, having been made several times in the past without setting off such uproar. T
he first tentative approach in this direction was made in 1867– the same year that America procured Alaska from Russia.
In 1946, under the Truman administration, the US offered $100,000,000 (in gold bullion) to purchase the territory. There were also negotiations for a US takeover in 1910 and 1955 which never reached fruition. As mentioned, Trump renewed the issue in 2019 and in his current term has done so again, apparently with renewed vigor.
Why all the French froth and fury?
None of these incidents ever stirred such indignant ire. So, the question is what is fueling France’s froth and fury this time—especially as there appear to be genuine issues of both US and wider Western security at stake—particularly, as Secretary of State Marco Rubio underscores—the inability of Denmark to contain Chinese encroachment in the Arctic.
Accordingly, some might be forgiven for suspecting that it may merely be a Élysée contrived smokescreen to divert public opinion from the pressing problems that are closing in on Macron’s beleaguered regime—from a faltering economy, through grave social unrest to mounting challenges from domestic rivals.
If so, it certainly seems to be an endeavor that is both shabby and shoddy…and doomed to be short-lived.
