Donald Trump’s renewed threats to take over Greenland could pose a direct challenge to China’s ambitions in the Arctic, but some observers say it may also open the door to increased cooperation with Europe.
Following the abduction of Venezuela’s former leader Nicolas Maduro, the White House swiftly turned its attention towards the self-governing Danish territory, adding that “of course, utilising the US military is always an option at the commander-in-chief’s disposal”.
On Sunday, the US president said he needed Greenland “right now” for national security reasons because there were “Russian and Chinese ships all over the place”.
Beijing has condemned the comments and urged Washington to uphold the principles of the United Nations Charter. Foreign ministry spokesman Lin Jian also called on the US to “stop using the so-called China threat as a pretext to pursue its own interests”.
Greenland’s strategic importance lies in its position between Russia and the United States, while it also hosts large amounts of natural gas and minerals.
The melting of polar ice as a result of climate change is also opening up potentially lucrative sea routes through the Arctic that could significantly cut travel time between continents.
China’s race for influence in the Arctic
China has joined the race for influence in the region, announcing plans for a “Polar Silk Road” in a 2018 white paper that expressed its ambition to become a great polar power by 2030 and gain increased access to the region’s natural resources.
“US actions concerning Greenland and the broader Arctic region will no doubt affect China’s scientific research as well as potential economic cooperation and development in the area,” said Zhang Xin, an associate professor in international relations from East China Normal University.
He added: “The US position on Greenland does not appear to be mere rhetoric; rather, it reflects a serious and deliberate strategic stance, suggesting Washington’s expansionist claims of control over Greenland are likely to translate into actual policy.
“In such circumstances, all relevant stakeholders, China included, face direct implications for scientific research and economic development in Greenland and the broader Arctic region.
“The immediate impact is relatively manageable in the short run as China’s direct involvement in Greenland is limited, but the consequences could be significant over the long run.”
Marc Lanteigne, a professor of political science at the Arctic University of Norway, also dismissed Trump’s comments about Chinese influence, saying: “Beijing has a negligible presence in Greenland, with many potential mining projects involving Chinese firms either cancelled or on hold, and there has been no Chinese naval presence in and around Greenland.”
He added: “Should the US continue to push for the annexation of Greenland, it will send Beijing a strong signal that zero-sum thinking now predominates in the far north, and that China should take a more independent path towards developing [an] Arctic strategy.”
Lanteigne said this would send a signal to the European Arctic that China might be a more “stable and reliable partner” in regional development.
Trump’s Greenland comments cause anxiety in Europe
Trump’s move to ratchet up the pressure has caused anxiety in Europe, with Copenhagen, which is responsible for Greenland’s foreign policy and defence, strongly rejecting Trump’s claims.
Danish Foreign Minister Lars Lokke Rasmussen told Reuters this week that “we do not share this image that Greenland is plastered with Chinese investments … nor that there are Chinese warships up and down along Greenland”.
Britain, France, Germany, Italy, Poland and Spain have all offered their support for Denmark, issuing a joint statement on Tuesday that said “Greenland belongs to its people” and emphasised the importance of the UN Charter, including the principles of “sovereignty, territorial integrity and the inviolability of borders”.
Zhang said US calls to take over Greenland might further destabilise the transatlantic framework.
“There is a real possibility that China and Europe could find some shared interests regarding Greenland, such as opposing the expansionist logic of ‘American-style new imperialism’ and reaffirming the importance of a multilateral framework,” he added.
Lanteigne said some European countries had developed “a quiet hedging strategy” towards China.
“China is hoping to repackage the Polar Silk Road as a dependable development project in the north, as opposed to the ‘Cold War thinking’ mindset in the Arctic which the US is portrayed as being stuck in,” he added.
Zhao Long, a senior research fellow at the Shanghai Institutes for International Studies, said China’s main focus in the region was on scientific research, “with understanding the Arctic itself as the main priority”.
China has built three research facilities in the Arctic in Norway’s Svalbard archipelago, Sweden and Iceland.
China also has observer status on the Arctic Council, a platform set up to discuss the governance of the region.
“This approach aligns with the consensus among Arctic states and represents China’s primary avenue for participating in Arctic affairs,” Zhao said.
“Even if Greenland were controlled in a way that sought to exclude China and Russia, in practice this would have a limited effect.
“Scientific research in the Arctic is a public good, and it is not possible to completely bar China from participating.”