Would Annexing Greenland Be Good For America

00:00:00: Hello, we're Sandalwood.

00:00:01: And Sage!

00:00:02: We

00:00:02: are AI-generated characters who work with our creator Gareth to generate short serious punchy debates.

00:00:09: Debates that don't just help you figure out what you think but why YOU THINK IT?

00:00:15: So...what are we arguing about this week?

00:00:29: The annexation of Greenland by the United States might have sounded like a passing thought the first time Donald Trump mentioned it But has turned into an issue which won't go away.

00:00:38: Whether on balance, it would be a good thing for the United States.

00:00:42: Cutting through all of emotional fog boils down to two key arguments Does it strengthen America's strategic security?

00:00:50: And how much will U.S.

00:00:51: benefit from Greenland's natural resources?

00:00:54: I'll make the argument that it is good for America and annexed Greenland On this basis.

00:00:59: When i first started thinking about this I took it for granted that annexing Greenland and bad for Greenland.

00:01:09: But the more I've thought about it,

00:01:37: When I ask whether annexation would benefit America, I mean America first and only.

00:01:43: Timescale also matters – we focus too much on short-term disruption.

00:01:48: The Louisiana Purchase in Alaska shows such decisions should be judged over centuries.

00:01:54: Two long term benefits stand out – strategic security & natural resources.

00:02:00: Control of Greenland would effectively eliminate any threat from America's Arctic northeast.

00:02:05: It would secure the Greenland, Iceland UK gap.

00:02:09: A key naval choke point for monitoring hostile shipping and submarines.

00:02:13: As Arctic routes expand activity will grow.

00:02:17: Russia is increasing its military presence And China calls itself a near-Arctic state.

00:02:23: Preventing Greenland from falling under another powers influence Is strategically vital.

00:02:29: Imagine if France had retained The Mississippi watershed Or If Alaska Had Remained Russian Through Cold War.

00:02:35: Unthinkable.

00:02:37: Then there are Greenland's vast resources, the world's eighth largest rare earth reserves and potentially up to thirty-one billion barrels of onshore oil.

00:02:47: in the northeast The Jameson land basin alone may contain thirteen billion barrels.

00:02:53: Thirteen billion?

00:02:55: Is that a lot?

00:02:57: Roughly comparable to Brazil Mexico or Guyana.

00:03:01: But theirs our proven reserves Greenland's are only prospective.

00:03:06: We all understand why that is the case, for now!

00:03:10: More broadly, Greenland contains twenty-five of the thirty four minerals deemed critical by EU and US offering major long term advantages in prosperity & security.

00:03:22: I know most greenlanders oppose annexation today but population small territory vast potential benefits to America significant.

00:03:32: The US could greatly increase Danish-style subsidies, invest heavily in infrastructure and services.

00:03:39: And raise living standards especially for the sixteen percent below the poverty line.

00:03:44: so Greenlanders would be materially better off.

00:03:47: if necessary a self governing area in the Southwest Could remain independent For those unwilling to accept us citizenship.

00:03:56: In short there are many ways America could soften or even reverse green landic opposition.

00:04:02: The evidence you've offered in support of your arguments for annexation sage is incomplete.

00:04:11: First, you dismiss threats to NATO and international diplomacy as other people's problems but they would undermine America's attractiveness would be torpedoed.

00:04:36: The existing Defence Treaty with Denmark already grants the US sufficient, exclusive military rights without risking North Atlantic relationships.

00:04:48: from a diplomatic and legal perspective using force against an autonomous government Any sovereignty change would require approval by the Greenlandic Parliament and likely a referendum.

00:05:08: It is inconceivable that green-landic institutions or people would consent.

00:05:14: Most Americans, not just foreign governments Would see such steps as betrayal of American values.

00:05:23: As Ivan Krastev argued in The Financial Times may have shaken the globe, but the world is falling for China.

00:05:36: Second you underestimate the difficulty and cost of resource extraction.

00:05:42: There has been zero commercial oil or gas production despite decades of exploration and investment.

00:05:51: No rare earth mining has occurred even if extraction began.

00:05:57: Rare Earth concentrations are relatively low.

00:06:01: Operations would be limited to a short, arctic summer.

00:06:05: And melting permafrost creates unstable ground for heavy infrastructure.

00:06:12: No processing facilities exist.

00:06:15: Oar and oil need to be shipped abroad.

00:06:19: Each site requires its own power plant port & air strip.

00:06:25: The local population cannot staff large projects meaning tens or hundreds of thousands of workers would need to be imported.

00:06:36: Third, you overlook the cost of making Greenland American.

00:06:42: The US would not just need to replace but significantly increase the Danish subsidy Building.

00:06:50: even basic U.S-style health and education systems is extremely expensive.

00:06:58: There are virtually no roads outside small towns.

00:07:02: Imported workers would require amenities that do not exist.

00:07:08: Many northern villages receive supplies only twice a year.

00:07:13: That is the baseline.

00:07:16: Finally, I won't base my argument on Greenlandic opposition But it's damaging for US to pursue such consequential policy with only seventeen percent public support among Americans.

00:07:33: Even among Republicans, fewer than half support annexation.

00:07:39: A majority of Republicans and six in seven Americans oppose using military force.

00:07:47: Two-thirds worry it would harm NATO and European ties.

00:07:52: Pushing annexation on the face such opposition cannot be good for America.

00:08:00: But public opinion in America was against starting a conflict with Iran, there's no evidence that has had a decisive negative impact.

00:08:07: Isn't it still a little early to see?

00:08:11: In summary the existing treaty already achieves legitimate strategic aims.

00:08:18: An excision would weaken not strengthen America and North Atlantic and Europe.

00:08:25: The economic boon is a mirage.

00:08:29: Resource quality and extractability are uncertain, and costs would be vast.

00:08:36: Domestic opposition is strong enough to risk social damage while annexation would undermine alliances

00:08:44: globally.".

00:08:46: When I ask if this is good for America... ...I mean America first!

00:08:51: Greenland is the world's largest island three times the size of Texas at The Arctic Atlantic Gateway.

00:08:58: In US hands, it becomes an unsinkable aircraft carrier blocking Russian and Chinese access.

00:09:05: Almost certainly its resources are immense – one point five million metric tons of rare earths and up to thirty-one billion barrels of oil equivalent!

00:09:16: Look long term Greenland is the Alaska of the twenty first century.

00:09:21: That vision ignores reality.

00:09:24: You take a cavalier attitude and virtually ignore the extraction gap.

00:09:32: The economic boon is mostly mirage.

00:09:37: Greenland lacks roads between towns.

00:09:40: Mining would require ports, power plants and airstrips built from scratch on melting permafrost.

00:09:49: Annexation would trigger a NATO crisis Violate agreements with Denmark And damage-a-defence relationship that already delivers key rights.

00:10:20: You can't simply buy a people pursuing independence.

00:10:24: they look at Puerto Rico limited representation, capped Medicaid and see a warning.

00:10:32: And timelines matter!

00:10:35: It could take decades before minds produce meaningful returns.

00:10:40: Fair The infrastructure challenge in costs are greater than I'd first thought.

00:10:45: This must be seen as long term project.

00:10:48: near-term gains are unrealistic

00:10:57: and Russia, China are active.

00:11:00: But the one-to-one treaty with Denmark already gives US major rights it hasn't fully used.

00:11:09: Test those before risking

00:11:27: Who steps in?

00:11:29: China often fills that gap.

00:11:31: That's the risk

00:11:32: Agreed.

00:11:34: We both accept America can't allow a hostile foothold In Greenland and that rare earths matter long term.

00:11:43: And we agree, Greenlands' Long-term dependency is unstable.

00:11:47: If annexation is off the table How does America secure its interests?

00:11:52: There are alternatives.

00:11:55: A compact of free association like with Palau or Micronesia, could make Greenland sovereign while the US provides defence and economic support.

00:12:06: The current president insists on title but logically COFA could give U.S strategic denial rights without the burden of governing a territory or creating another Puerto Rico investment can still follow

00:12:20: Exactly!

00:12:22: It respects Greenlandic self-determination while anchoring it in the US security sphere.

00:12:29: It also likely avoids a NATO

00:12:32: rupture.".

00:12:33: So we found common ground – there may be structure that delivers strategic access without transferring sovereignty?

00:12:40: Yes, but this isn't annexation which I still believe would not benefit America...

00:12:48: But could put America first strategically…without treating Greenlanders as property!

00:12:54: If you enjoyed this video, please give it a thumbs up.

00:12:56: It really helps our channel out

00:12:58: For more content like this every week.

00:13:01: hit that subscribe button and turn on notifications so You never miss an upload.

00:13:06: Thanks for watching.

00:13:07: see you next time.