Trump Refuses to Exclude ‘Military Option’ for Greenland, Panama Canal Acquisition

President-elect Donald Trump recently discussed the possibility of using “military force” or economic leverage to bring Greenland and the Panama Canal under U.S. control during an interview. This statement came in response to a reporter’s question regarding his administration’s approach to territorial expansion. Trump left the option open, stating that he could not assure the public that military or economic coercion would not be considered. His comments underscore a potential aggressive stance towards international relations, echoing some historical precedents where nations expanded territories through force or strategic diplomacy.

Greenland, the world’s largest island, is an autonomous country within the Kingdom of Denmark with a population of just around 56,000, most of whom are indigenous Inuit. It has been of strategic interest to multiple world powers due to its size, Arctic location, and untapped natural resources, particularly as the Arctic ice melts, potentially opening new shipping lanes and areas for resource extraction. While the idea of annexing Greenland might seem far-fetched, Trump’s mention of Greenland reflects a possible interest in the Arctic’s strategic importance, rather than immediate military action. However, such statements could stir tensions with Denmark and other nations with interests in the Arctic region.

Moving to the Panama Canal, this vital maritime route connects the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans, allowing for shorter, safer, and less expensive maritime travel than sailing around the southern tip of South America. The control over this canal has always been a matter of geopolitical importance. Following the US’s involvement in the Panamanian revolution from Colombia in 1903, the treaty allowed the U.S. to build, control, and manage the canal until it was handed over to Panama on December 31, 1999, in a series of agreements signed in 1977. Trump’s suggestion of revisiting the governance of the canal could face significant backlash from Panama and the international community, given the canal’s history and current treaties that recognize Panamanian sovereignty over it.

Trump’s comments, while potentially seen as part of his negotiation tactics or “America First” policy bravado, inevitably raise questions about international law, the sovereignty of nations, and global diplomatic relations. Such a policy could lead to a deterioration of U.S. relations with allies like Denmark and provoke a complex response from Latin America, where memories of U.S. interventions still linger. Moreover, any move towards annexing or controlling territories by force or coercion in the current global climate could lead to significant pushback and possibly unite other countries against such actions, affecting U.S. foreign policy and relations in a more negative light. Thus, his statements, while possibly designed to provoke discussion or shift focus, highlight underlying tensions and the sensitive topic of territorial integrity in international politics.

Source
https://nypost.com/2025/01/07/us-news/trump-wont-rule-out-using-military-force-to-acquire-greenland-panama-canal/