By John Q. Hosedrinker 
Following a meeting in Paris, Greenlandic and Danish leaders presented a unified front amidst external pressures. Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen warned of a changing world order and emphasized the need for European allies to work together, particularly regarding Arctic security and concerns about Russia. Greenland’s Prime Minister Jens-Frederik Nielsen echoed this sentiment, asserting Greenland’s commitment to security while also vowing to resist foreign influence. The leaders’ comments come after talks with German Chancellor Friedrich Merz and are followed by a meeting with French President Emmanuel Macron, all while U.S. President Donald Trump pursues a deal regarding Greenland, despite strong local opposition.
Read the original article here
Greenland’s prime minister, in a firm declaration, has made it abundantly clear: Greenland will not yield. This resolute stance comes as Denmark issues a stark warning, essentially declaring the end of the world order as we’ve known it. It feels like we’re watching a tectonic shift in global power dynamics.
The echoes of the late P.M. Carney’s words from Davos are resonating. It’s a modern retelling of Niemöller’s haunting verse, a sentiment quickly embraced by many. The message is clear: the Pax Americana, the era of American dominance, is over. The fact that the world is facing the end of the world order again, and that it’s linked to the actions of an American president violating international laws, raises serious concerns.
The response from some quarters suggests a desire to punish the U.S. through boycotts and protests. The sentiment is fueled by a perception that the U.S. has used its power for self-interest, manipulating the “rules-based” world order to its advantage, only to discard them when others began to succeed. The examples of Venezuela and Greenland show a hard power to coerce other countries. This has prompted reactions of not wanting to support the U.S. at all.
This shift isn’t just about political maneuvering; it’s also about resources and strategic positioning. Greenland, with its vast ice sheet and strategic location, is a key piece in the Arctic puzzle, holding potential for rare earth minerals and sovereign territory. Denmark’s warning isn’t just about the abstract concept of “world order”; it’s about losing their influence at the Arctic table, and by extension, their position on the world stage.
However, the future is uncertain and dangerous, given the threat of nuclear war. The world order of the country with the biggest stick will remain as the ogliarchs will keep robbing others under them of their right to live. It’s easy to see the appeal of breaking free from what they perceive as American hegemony. As countries like Greenland assert their autonomy, it could be a sign of a new world.
The situation becomes clearer when looking at how this is being interpreted in the U.S. It seems Trump’s actions, and the attitudes that underpin them, are accelerating this decline. He sought to undermine the existing order by challenging existing alliances. There’s a clear sense that the U.S. is withdrawing from its global policing role, no longer seeing it as beneficial. The U.S. doesn’t want to be the world’s police anymore, which may lead the U.S. to overall lose out.
This shift presents a challenge for many, as the loss of trust in the US creates the one thing it fought to avoid, another superpower.
The EU has been rapidly making itself independent of US weapons, tech, and influence, including weapon manufacturers and cloud data centers. This move has created a new superpower, which might be perceived as “whining” from the US, which is actually pretty bad news.
Furthermore, the US is losing the soft power that it has curated for decades. Europe has signed trade agreements with India, which represents about 35% of the world’s GDP. By withdrawing from their role, the US faces a diminished global role, while other nations begin to diversify. The U.S. refusal to acknowledge the International Criminal Court disqualifies them as the world police.
There’s a sense of frustration that the rules are only followed when the U.S. benefits, leading to a breakdown of established norms. The US was already trending in this direction before, as other countries like China, were taking advantage of the current system.