Expansion or trolling? What lies behind Trump's words about Greenland and Panama Canal

Contents

• Greenland and the Panama Canal: What Trump said
• Status of Greenland and attempts to buy the island
• Why Trump talked about control over the Panama Canal
• Are Trump's claims about Canada realistic?

Greenland and the Panama Canal: What Trump said

Over the weekend, Trump expressed his frustration with the "excessive fees" for using the Panama Canal. "ur Navy and Commerce have been treated in a very unfair and injudicious way. The fees being charged by Panama are ridiculous, especially knowing the extraordinary generosity that has been bestowed to Panama by the US," he wrote on Truth Social.

His complaints stem from the fact that the Panama Canal was built with American funds. He also criticized the decision by 39th President Jimmy Carter to hand the canal over to Panama for just $1 under the 1977 treaty. According to Trump, the canal is vital for the US, as over 70% of all transits are directed to American ports.

"It was not given for the benefit of others, but merely as a token of cooperation with us and Panama. If the principles, both moral and legal, of this magnanimous gesture of giving are not followed, then we will demand that the Panama Canal be returned to us, in full, and without question," he added.

Panamanian President José Raúl Mulino responded by stating that every meter of the canal belongs to Panama, and its sovereignty is not up for discussion. Trump responded with "We’ll see about that!" and "Welcome to the US Canal," posting an image with the American flag.

As for Greenland, Trump announced former US Ambassador to Sweden and PayPal co-founder Ken Howery as his nominee for US Ambassador to Denmark. "For the purposes of national security and freedom around the world, the United States of America believes that possession and control of Greenland is an absolute necessity. Ken will do an excellent job," Trump wrote.

This isn’t Trump's first attempt to acquire Greenland. The idea was discussed with senior advisors as early as 2018, and Senator Tom Cotton had proposed buying the island in a letter to the Danish ambassador. The discussions became public in 2019, after which Greenlandic and Danish officials rejected the idea of a sale.

Responses ranged from diplomatic comments saying "Greenland is not for sale" to firm refusals, stating that it was "absolutely ridiculous." Danish Foreign Minister Mette Frederiksen stated, "This is an absurd discussion because Greenland is not for sale. Greenland is not Danish. Greenland is Greenlandic."

As a result, Trump even canceled a planned visit to Denmark.

Status of Greenland and attempts to buy the island

The idea of gaining control over Greenland predates Trump. It is believed that during the 19th and 20th centuries, the United States made at least two serious attempts. The reason why such discussions are even possible lies in the island's status.

Greenland became a Danish colony in 1814, and in 1953, it was recognized as part of the Kingdom of Denmark. Two decades later, it even joined the European Economic Community (the precursor to today’s European Union) but later left it. After a 1979 referendum, Denmark granted the island self-governance, and in 2009, it was given even more power.

Today, Greenland is an autonomous territory and, in effect, a separate country. Along with Denmark and the Faroe Islands, it is one of the three countries that make up the Kingdom of Denmark. Copenhagen retains control over foreign relations, defense, and monetary policy. All internal political and economic matters are decided by Greenland itself.

Its area exceeds 2 million square kilometers, making it the largest island on Earth, surrounded by the waters of the Atlantic and Arctic Oceans. Geographically, it belongs to North America, as it is located in the northeastern part of the continent. However, politically, it is still considered part of Europe.

Photo: Greenland holds strategic interest for the US due to its proximity to Russia and Europe (csis.org)

The first attempt to acquire Greenland took place in the second half of the 19th century. At the time, US Secretary of State William Seward (a proponent of territorial expansion) also focused on efforts to wrest Canada from the British Empire. His policies led to the purchase of Alaska from the Russian Empire. However, they also included plans to acquire Greenland and Iceland.

In 1867, former Treasury Secretary Robert J. Walker learned that Denmark might be persuaded to sell both islands while negotiating the purchase of Danish colonies in the Caribbean in the West Indies. Seward tasked him with preparing a report on Greenland's and Iceland's resources, but his hopes were dashed when the US Senate rejected a deal regarding the Danish West Indies. Fifty years later, these colonies would still be bought and become the US Virgin Islands.

The second attempt came after World War II. During the war, Nazi Germany occupied Denmark in a six-hour operation in March 1940. However, a year later, the Danish ambassador to the US, who was not under the control of the occupying government, signed an agreement to station US bases in Greenland.

During the military occupation, the US built several facilities on the island. After the war, the idea of purchasing Greenland was discussed so seriously that, according to a Gallup poll, 33% of Americans supported the idea of acquiring the island for $1 billion in 1946. Ultimately, Denmark rejected the proposal and offered Greenland full membership in the kingdom rather than keeping it a colony.

Nevertheless, the US got what it wanted: air bases and other facilities that played an essential role in America's nuclear strategy. At the start of the Cold War, the strategy was not based on intercontinental missiles but on bombers with relatively limited flight ranges. Bases in Greenland provided a reliable and efficient route to targets in the USSR via polar regions. And when the US demanded additional bases, Denmark agreed.

As for Donald Trump's idea during his first presidential term, nothing came of it except "dinner-time musings," wrote Paul Musgrave, an associate professor at the University of Massachusetts, in a 2019 column for Foreign Policy.

In his opinion, Trump was not very well-informed about the island. As WSJ reported, Trump wanted to make a deal based on Greenland's natural resources and hoped to leave a legacy "similar to Dwight Eisenhower’s acceptance of Alaska as a state."

But there are a number of obstacles to this. First, countries generally do not trade sovereignty. This is especially true for places with large indigenous populations, such as Greenland, where 88% of the residents are Inuit. Second, according to Danish doctrine, Greenland is an integral part of the kingdom. Third, as a democratic country, the United States bears a special responsibility to reject colonial practices. Right now, Greenland is more on the path to full independence than to a change of one sovereignty for another.

Musgrave wrote that, in any case, the idea of purchasing Greenland was not a foolish one, regardless of how carelessly Trump had considered it. He described it as a dangerous and illustrative idea, suggesting that the president's tendency to treat everything like a real estate deal indicated that he was constantly tempted to revive some of the worst habits of international relations.

Reacting to his nomination, the future US Ambassador to Denmark, Ken Howery, stated that he was pleased and looking forward to the opportunity to work with teams at the embassy in Copenhagen and the consulate in Nuuk (Greenland) to strengthen ties with the US Influential member of the Trump team, Elon Musk, urged him to "help America gain Greenland."

Why Trump talked about control over the Panama Canal

Expressing grievances with Panama, Trump stated that the 82-kilometer route between the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans was being exploited "extremely unfairly and unreasonably." He emphasized that the Panama Canal was handed over as a sign of cooperation and was "It was solely for Panama to manage, not China, or anyone else."

Photo: The Panama Canal handles 70% of US traffic, and Trump is dissatisfied with the high tolls for ship passage and the growing influence of China (wikipedia.org)

Every year, about 14,000 ships cross the Panama Canal, with the United States accounting for roughly three-quarters of the traffic. However, in recent years, droughts have forced authorities to reduce the canal's capacity, leading to competition for slots and increased tolls for passage.

The project was first undertaken by the French in the 1880s, but it was abandoned due to technical issues and tropical diseases. The United States restarted it in 1904 and completed it in 10 years, spending nearly $12 billion (in today's money). The canal revolutionized global shipping, shortening trade routes and allowing the US to rapidly deploy military vessels from the Atlantic to the Pacific.

In 1977, President Jimmy Carter signed an agreement for the gradual transfer of the canal to Panama, which was completed in 1999. Donald Trump has referred to the agreement as foolish and expressed concern about China's influence.

Although he has not publicly spoken about buying the Panama Canal, in 2018, he convinced the country to join his One Belt, One Road initiative. Since then, Chinese companies have managed major ports at both ends and have participated in projects along the waterway. Additionally, they have gained control of Margarita Island, home to Panama's largest port on the Atlantic side. According to the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS, Washington), China's ambitions in Panama and surrounding areas have raised concerns among US ruling circles.

So far, only President José Raúl Mulino has responded to Trump's remarks, stating that sovereignty cannot be a subject for discussion. According to Bloomberg, Panama's government is expected to make an official statement in the coming days.

Emily Stausbøll, an analyst from the Xeneta maritime and air freight platform, commented that Trump's remarks add to the uncertainty surrounding global trade in 2025. She stated that the likelihood of this actually coming to fruition was so low that no reaction from shippers or carriers was expected at that stage.

John McCown, a veteran of the shipping industry and author of the book "Giants of the Sea," noted that tolls for crossing the Panama Canal per ship in 2023 had increased by 29% compared to 2017. In his view, the return of U.S. control would pose more risks than benefits.

"This decision was long ago made and appropriately documented and we can't just unilaterally say it never happened. If we do that, what’s to stop Russia from saying we want Alaska back or France from saying we want the Louisiana Purchase back? So, at multiple levels, this threat makes no sense to me," he said, according to Bloomberg.

Lars Jensen, CEO of the consulting company Vespucci Maritime, also pointed out that Trump's demand to lower tolls for US ships would violate Panama's neutrality agreement.

Are Trump's claims about Canada realistic?

Last week, Trump suggested making Canada a part of the United States, calling it "a great idea."

"No one can answer why we subsidize Canada to the tune of over $100,000,000 a year? Makes no sense! Many Canadians want Canada to become the 51st State. They would save massively on taxes and military protection. I think it is a great idea. 51st State!!!" he wrote on Truth Social.

Photo: Donald Trump has been constantly trolling Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau since his election (Getty Images)

This is not the first time in recent days that Trump has mocked Justin Trudeau's government, which was rocked by the resignation of Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland. "The Great State of Canada is stunned as the Finance Minister resigns, or was fired, from her position by Governor Justin Trudeau," the elected US president wrote.

The trolling comes amid rising tensions after Trump threatened to impose a 25% tariff on Canadian goods and accused Trudeau of failing to resolve trade and immigration issues. After a meeting at the Mar-a-Lago resort in November, Trump began referring to him as the "Governor of the Great State of Canada."

According to Fox News, everyone took this as a joke, and Canadians reacted with "nervous laughter." Minister of Public Safety Dominic LeBlanc stated that it was "in no way a serious comment."

Despite the resurgence of support for US expansion in a small circle of supporters, Trump is flirting with an idea that has not gained widespread traction over the years. This is because Americans are not interested in it. For instance, during free trade negotiations in the 1980s, Lee Craig Schoonmaker (an interesting figure in US political history, one of the founders of the LGBT rights movement) mocked Canada's fears that America would "tear off the maple leaf."It is not Canadian nationalism but simple U.S. apathy that has prevented annexation of parts or all of Canada," he wrote.

The last serious attempt by the US to annex parts of Canada occurred just before it became an independent dominion in 1867. At that time, Republican Congressman Nathaniel Banks introduced a bill to recognize the British North American colonies as the territory of Canada. However, the bill failed even at the committee stage.

Since the 1860s, the US has organized military campaigns in over 100 countries. However, during this time, there have been no plans for the "annexation" of Canada. Today, such a move is even less feasible due to political factors, writes the Canadian news agency National Post.

The issue is that turning 40 million Canadians into US citizens could lead to a seismic shift to the left in US politics, with devastating consequences for the Republicans and Trump. Even the most conservative areas, such as the province of Alberta, would likely lean towards the Democrats.

According to research, Canadians tend to favor left-wing ideas on issues ranging from abortion to gun rights. This trend is more apparent in surveys asking how they would vote in a US presidential election. The latest study shows a crushing defeat for Trump.

Any US president with "ambitions to annex Canada" risks triggering a generation of uncontested Democratic dominance. Throughout its history, the US has been extremely cautious about admitting new states due to concerns over upsetting the political balance. For example, in the past century, the admission of states was often delayed for fear that a new participant would provide a strategic advantage to either pro-slavery or anti-slavery factions, National Post writes.

Sources: statements from US President-elect Donald Trump, materials from Bloomberg, Associated Press, Foreign Policy, National Post, Fox News, and The Telegraph.