Will Donald Trump take Greenland by force?
The US president says the semi-autonomous Danish territory is crucial to US national security and that Washington should take it over.
Trump's comments have raised alarms in Greenland, particularly after US Vice President JD Vance announced he would visit the island.
Greenland is rich in minerals, and it's strategically located. But its people say their territory is not for sale.
So, will this threat further alienate the US's European allies?
And how far is Trump willing to go to get what he wants?
Presenter: Elizabeth Puranam
Guests:
Marc Jacobsen – Associate professor at the Royal Danish Defence College
Jim Townsend – Senior fellow at the Center for a New American Security
Ed Arnold – Research fellow for European Security at the Royal United Services Institute, a defence and security think tank
Pele Broberg – Leader of the pro-independence Naleraq party in Greenland
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Al Jazeera
6 minutes ago
- Al Jazeera
Hearing begins in Harvard's case against the Trump administration
A federal court has begun hearings in a pivotal case as Harvard seeks to force the United States government to return $2.6bn in federal funding frozen earlier this year. A lawyer for Harvard, Steven Lehotsky, said at Monday's hearing that the case is about the government trying to control the 'inner workings' of Harvard. The funding cuts, if not reversed, could lead to the loss of research, damaged careers and the closing of labs, he said. President Donald Trump's administration has battered the nation's oldest and wealthiest university with sanctions for months as it presses a series of demands on the Ivy League school, which it decries as a hotbed of liberalism and anti-Semitism. Harvard has resisted, and the lawsuit over the cuts to its research grants represents the primary challenge to the administration in a standoff that is being widely watched across higher education and beyond. The case is before US District Judge Allison Burroughs, who is presiding over lawsuits brought by Harvard against the administration's efforts to keep it from hosting international students. In that case, she temporarily blocked the administration's efforts. At Monday's hearing, Harvard is asking her to reverse a series of funding freezes. Such a ruling, if it stands, would revive Harvard's sprawling scientific and medical research operation and hundreds of projects that lost federal money. A lawyer for the government, Michael Velchik, said the government has the authority to cancel research grants when an institution is out of compliance with the president's directives. He said episodes at Harvard violated Trump's order combating anti-Semitism. Judge questions basis for government's findings on anti-Semitism Burroughs pushed back, questioning how the government could make 'ad hoc' decisions to cancel grants and do so across Harvard without offering evidence that any of the research is anti-Semitic. She also argued the government had provided 'no documentation, no procedure' to 'suss out' whether Harvard administrators 'have taken enough steps or haven't' to combat anti-Semitism. 'The consequences of that in terms of constitutional law are staggering,' she said during Monday's hearing. 'I don't think you can justify a contract action based on impermissible suppression of speech. Where do I have that wrong?' Velchik said the case comes down to the government's choosing how best to spend billions of dollars in research funding. 'Harvard claims the government is anti-Harvard. I reject that,' Velchik said. 'The government is pro-Jewish students at Harvard. The government is pro-Jewish faculty at Harvard.' Harvard's lawsuit accuses the Trump administration of waging a retaliation campaign against the university after it rejected a series of demands in an April 11 letter from a federal anti-Semitism task force. A second lawsuit over the cuts filed by the American Association of University Professors and its Harvard faculty chapter has been consolidated with the university's. The April letter demanded sweeping changes related to campus protests, academics and admissions. For example, the letter told Harvard to audit the viewpoints of students and faculty and admit more students or hire new professors if the campus was found to lack diverse points of view. Harvard President Alan Garber has said the university has made changes to combat anti-Semitism but said no government 'should dictate what private universities can teach, whom they can admit and hire, and which areas of study and inquiry they can pursue'. Monday's hearing ended without Burroughs issuing a ruling from the bench. A ruling is expected later in writing. Trump's pressure campaign has involved a series of sanctions The same day Harvard rejected the government's demands, Trump officials moved to freeze $2.2bn in research grants. Education Secretary Linda McMahon declared in May that Harvard would no longer be eligible for new grants, and weeks later, the administration began cancelling contracts with Harvard. As Harvard fought the funding freeze in court, individual agencies began sending letters announcing the frozen research grants were being terminated. They cited a clause that allows grants to be scrapped if they no longer align with government policies. Harvard, which has the nation's largest endowment at $53bn, has moved to self-fund some of its research, but warned it can't absorb the full cost of the federal cuts. In court filings, the school said the government 'fails to explain how the termination of funding for research to treat cancer, support veterans, and improve national security addresses antisemitism'. The Trump administration denies the cuts were made in retaliation, saying the grants were under review even before the April demand letter was sent. It argues the government has wide discretion to cancel contracts for policy reasons. The research funding is only one front in Harvard's fight with the federal government. The Trump administration also has sought to prevent the school from hosting foreign students, and Trump has threatened to revoke Harvard's tax-exempt status. Finally, last month, the Trump administration formally issued a finding that the school tolerated anti-Semitism – a step that eventually could jeopardise all of Harvard's federal funding, including federal student loans or grants. The penalty is typically referred to as a 'death sentence'.
Al Jazeera
36 minutes ago
- Al Jazeera
Philippines' Marcos to meet Trump seeking trade deal
Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos Jr will meet United States President Donald Trump this week, hoping Manila's status as a key Asian ally will secure a more favourable trade deal. Marcos will be the first Southeast Asian leader to meet Trump during the US leader's second term. Trump has already struck trade deals with two of Manila's regional partners, Vietnam and Indonesia, driving tough bargains in negotiations even with close allies that Washington wants to keep onside in its strategic rivalry with China. 'I expect our discussions to focus on security and defence, of course, but also on trade,' Marcos said in a speech before leaving Manila and arriving in Washington on Sunday, with hopes to reach a deal before August 1, when Trump says he will impose 20 percent tariffs on goods from the Philippines. 'We will see how much progress we can make when it comes to the negotiations with the United States concerning the changes that we would like to institute to alleviate the effects of a very severe tariff schedule on the Philippines,' Marcos said. The US had a deficit of nearly $5bn with the Philippines last year on bilateral goods trade of $23.5bn. Trump this month raised the threatened 'reciprocal' tariffs on imports from the Philippines to 20 percent from 17 percent threatened in April. Although US allies in Asia such as Japan and South Korea have yet to strike trade deals with Trump, Gregory Poling, a Southeast Asia expert at Washington's Center for Strategic and International Studies, said Marcos might be able to do better than Vietnam, with its agreement of a 20 percent baseline tariff on its goods, and Indonesia at 19 percent. 'I wouldn't be surprised to see an announcement of a deal with the Philippines at a lower rate than those two,' Poling told the Reuters news agency. Marcos visited the Pentagon on Monday morning for talks with Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and will see Secretary of State Marco Rubio later in the day, before meeting Trump at the White House on Tuesday. He will also meet US business leaders investing in the Philippines. Philippine officials say Marcos's focus will be on economic cooperation and Manila's concerns about Trump's tariffs. They say he will stress that Manila must become economically stronger if it is to serve as a truly robust US partner in the Asia Pacific. Philippine Assistant Foreign Secretary Raquel Solano said last week that trade officials have been working with US counterparts seeking to seal a 'mutually acceptable and mutually beneficial' deal for both countries. China tensions Trump and Marcos will also discuss defence and security, and Solano said the Philippine president would be looking to further strengthen the longstanding defence alliance. Philippine media quoted Manila's ambassador to Washington, Jose Manuel Romualdez, as saying on Sunday that the visit would see a reaffirmation of the seven-decade-old mutual defence treaty and 'discussions on how we can continue to cooperate with the United States, our major ally'. With the Philippines facing intense pressure from China in the contested South China Sea, Marcos has pivoted closer to the US, expanding access to Philippine military bases amid China's threats towards Taiwan, the democratically governed island claimed by Beijing. The US and the Philippines hold dozens of annual exercises, which have included training with the US Typhon missile system, and more recently, with the NMESIS antiship missile system, angering China. Manila and the US have closely aligned their views on China, Poling said, and it was notable that Rubio and Hegseth made sure their Philippine counterparts were the first Southeast Asian officials they met. Poling said Trump also seemed to have a certain warmth towards Marcos, based on their phone call after Trump's re-election.
Al Jazeera
12 hours ago
- Al Jazeera
In South Korea, Trump's tariff threats place US love affair under strain
Seoul, South Korea – When Sideny Sim had a chance to visit the United States on business several years ago, it was the fulfilment of a lifelong dream. Like many South Koreans, Sim had long admired the US as a cultural juggernaut and positive force in the world. These days, Sim, a 38-year-old engineer living near Seoul, feels no such love towards the country. As US President Donald Trump threatens to impose a 25 percent tariff on South Korea from August 1, Sim cannot help but feel betrayed. 'If they used to be a country that was known to be a leader in culture, the economy and the perception of being 'good,' I feel like the US is now a threat to geopolitical balance,' Sim told Al Jazeera. South Korea and the US share deep and enduring ties. South Korea is one of Washington's closest allies in Asia, hosting about 28,000 US troops as a bulwark against North Korea. The US is home to a larger South Korean diaspora than any other country. But with the return of Trump's 'America First' agenda to Washington, DC, those ties are coming under strain. In a Pew Research Center survey released earlier this month, 61 percent of South Koreans expressed a favourable view of the US, down from 77 percent in 2024. Like dozens of other US trading partners, South Korea is facing severe economic disruption if it cannot reach a trade deal with the Trump administration by the August deadline. The Asian country, which is a major producer of electronics, ships and cars, generates more than 40 percent of its gross domestic product (GDP) from exports. In addition to sending a letter to South Korean President Lee Jae-Myung outlining his tariff threats, Trump earlier this month also claimed that Seoul pays 'very little' to support the presence of US Forces Korea (USFK). Trump's comments reinforced speculation that he could demand that the South Korean government increase its national defence spending or contributions to the costs of the USFK. After Trump last week told reporters that South Korea 'wants to make a deal right now,' Seoul's top trade envoy said that an 'in-principle' agreement was possible by the deadline. With the clock ticking on a deal, the uncertainty created by Trump's trade policies has stirred resentment among many South Koreans. Kim Hyunju, a customer service agent working in Seoul, said that although her company would not be directly affected by the tariffs, Trump's trade salvoes did not seem fair. 'It would only be fair if they are OK with us raising our tariffs to the same level as well,' Kim told Al Jazeera, adding that the Trump administration's actions had caused her to feel animosity towards the US. 'I can't help but see the US as a powerful nation which fulfils its interests with money and sheer power plays,' Kim said. 'I've always thought of the US as a friendly ally that is special to us, especially in terms of national defence. I know it is good for us to maintain this friendly status, but I sort of lost faith when Trump also demanded a larger amount of money for the US military presence in our country.' Kim Chang-chul, an investment strategist in Seoul, expressed a more sanguine view of Trump's trade policies, even while acknowledging the harm they could do to South Korean businesses. 'The US tariff policy is a burden for our government and businesses, but the move really shows the depth of US decision-making and strategy,' Kim told Al Jazeera. 'Trump wants South Korea to be more involved in the US's energy ambitions in Alaska. It's part of the US pushing for geopolitical realignment and economic rebalancing.' Earlier this year, the US held talks with South Korean officials about boosting US exports of liquefied natural gas (LNG) to South Korea, a major LNG importer. Keum Hye-yoon, a researcher at the Korea Institute for International Economic Policy (KIEP), said it has been difficult for a US ally like South Korea to make sense of Trump's comments and actions. 'When Trump cites 'fairness' in his tariff policy, it's based on unilateral expectations of improving the US trade balance or restoring economic strength to certain industries,' Keum told Al Jazeera. 'As allies like South Korea share supply chains with the US and work closely with its companies, disregarding these structures and imposing high taxes will likely create burdens on US businesses and consumers as well.' While Trump's most severe tariffs have yet to come into effect, South Korean manufacturers have already reported some disruption. South Korea's exports dropped 2.2 percent in the first 20 days of July compared with a year earlier, according to preliminary data released by Korea Customs Service on Monday. Kim Sung-hyeok, the head of research at the Korean Confederation of Trade Unions (KCTU) Labour Institute, said exporters in the auto, steel, semiconductor and pharmaceutical sectors had been especially affected. 'As exports in these fields decreased considerably since the tariff announcements, production orders in domestic factories have declined,' Kim told Al Jazeera. 'Some automotive and steel production lines have closed temporarily, while other manufacturing sites have closed altogether. Voluntary resignations and redeployments have become rampant in some of these workplaces.' Kim said small companies may face the brunt of the tariffs as they are not capable of 'moving their manufacturing plants to the US', or 'diversifying their trade avenues outside of the US'. 'And as major companies face a general decline in exports, these small companies will consequently face a shortage in product delivery volume that will cause employment disputes,' he said. The Korea Development Institute estimated in May that the number of employed South Koreans would increase by just 90,000 this year, in part due to the economic uncertainties, compared with a rise of 160,000 last year. Even before Trump's arrival on the political scene, US-South Korea relations had gone through difficult periods in the past. In 2002, two South Korean middle-school girls were killed when they were struck by a US Army armoured vehicle. After the American soldiers involved in the incident were found not guilty of negligent homicide by a US military court, the country saw an explosion in anti-US sentiment and nationwide protests. In 2008, nationwide protests took place after the South Korean government decided to continue importing US beef despite concerns about the risk of Mad Cow Disease. More recently, President Lee, who was elected in June, has emphasised the importance of maintaining positive relations with China, Washington's biggest strategic rival and competitor. The KIEP's Keum said the US-South Korea relationship has evolved into a partnership where the US has become a 'conditional ally', where 'economic interests take precedence over traditional alliance'. 'The US is increasingly demanding South Korea to cooperate in its containment strategy of China among its other socioeconomic policies,' she said. Keum said that South Korea will need to seek out alternative markets and diversify its exports to mitigate the fallout of Trump's agenda. 'South Korea also doesn't need to act alone. The country can seek joint action with countries such as EU members, Japan and Canada to come up with joint responses to the current predicament,' she said.
