A-Infos (en) Italy, FDCA, Cantiere #42 - Greenland: Curbing Chinese and Russian Ambitions - Lino Roveredo (ca, de, fr, it, pt, tr)[machine translation]

US President Donald Trump's obsession with annexing Greenland is 
disorienting European public opinion. While at first it seemed like just 
another outburst from a capricious tyrant, once the threats escalated 
into action, there was widespread confusion. In reality, this obsession 
of the American autocrat is just one of the many manifestations we have 
been forced to witness in recent times, and which should be interpreted 
as urgent signs of the end of a historical cycle.
Russia's invasion of Ukraine, the genocide of the Palestinian people by 
Benjamin Netanyahu's Israeli government, and Trump's military aggression 
against Venezuela-culminating in the arrest of dictator Nicolás Maduro 
and his wife Cilia Flores-are the three major events that indicate that 
the thirty-year period of illusions, which began with the collapse of 
the Soviet regime and the end of bipolarism, has now dramatically come 
to an end.
We are witnessing the twilight of a global order founded on the hegemony 
of the United States, the only power to survive the Cold War, and on the 
liberal-democratic rules of international law that for decades have 
governed relations between states, "promising" peace and prosperity.
In reality, with regard to international law, it is worth noting that it 
has not always been respected by the great powers (the United States, 
Russia, China, etc.). Conversely, when political or strategic interests 
prevail over shared rules, international law is systematically 
violated-as demonstrated by the cases of Panama and Iraq-without real 
consequences for the responsible states. Furthermore, the veto power 
exercised by some powers within the UN Security Council highlights how 
the application of international law is more the exception than the norm.
The players in this new historical cycle (China, India, and Russia, both 
individually and as BRICS) have already forcefully entered the scene, 
aiming to redefine the international balance of power. The planet is 
ablaze, with more than fifty active wars, and each player is playing its 
part to increase its sphere of influence in order to secure control of 
trade networks and the supply of raw materials.
Another element that distinguishes this new phase of inter-imperialist 
competition is its geographic dimension. Nation states no longer play a 
key role: the competition now takes place between countries of 
continental proportions, whose size renders smaller competitors 
structurally irrelevant.
Given the above, the Greenland dispute, like any other international 
event, must be seen within this new framework of developing hegemonic 
relations between imperialist powers.
Let's see what strategic role Greenland plays for the United States and 
beyond.
Strategic raw materials and trade routes
Greenland is a Danish island located between the North Atlantic and the 
Arctic Sea. With a population of 56,542, it is the least densely 
populated territory on Earth (0.03 inhabitants/km²). Despite being part 
of the Kingdom of Denmark, following the 2008 referendum, it gained 
extensive autonomy, which resulted in the transfer of legislative and 
judicial powers, as well as the management of natural resources, to the 
local government.
The island's economy is primarily based on tourism and fishing, although 
approximately 30% of GDP comes from subsidies from Denmark. At the same 
time, the territory is particularly rich in raw materials. The Arctic 
region, in fact, is home to significant natural resources: not only 
hydrocarbons such as natural gas and oil, but also rare earths and other 
strategic minerals, crucial to the global energy transition. According 
to a 2008 estimate by the US Geological Survey, approximately 30% of the 
world's undiscovered natural gas and 13% of its oil lie beneath the 
Arctic ice.
Global warming is making Greenland's natural resources more accessible, 
thanks to melting ice and longer shipping seasons. This facilitates the 
exploration and extraction of strategic minerals, although actual 
exploitation remains limited by high costs, environmental constraints, 
and political choices geared toward protecting a particularly fragile 
ecosystem.
But climate change is also profoundly transforming maritime trade 
routes. The Arctic, long impassable by ice, is emerging as a strategic 
alternative to the Suez Canal. The so-called Arctic route, or Northern 
Route, currently controlled and militarized by Russia, promises faster 
and more cost-effective connections between Asia and Europe.
Using this route, for example, would allow a container to cover the 
distance between Shenzhen and Hamburg in about 23 days, compared to 34 
via Suez or 48 for circumnavigating Africa. For this reason, numerous 
shipping companies are evaluating alternative routes, including passages 
around the Cape of Good Hope, in light of instability in the Middle East 
and the threat posed by Houthi attacks on maritime traffic in the Strait 
of Bab el-Mandeb, off the coast of Yemen.
According to Article 234 of the 1982 United Nations Convention on the 
Law of the Sea, Arctic countries have the right to regulate maritime 
traffic along the Arctic route, including the right to impose tolls on 
foreign vessels. However, this option only applies if the route remains 
ice-free for most of the year, as has been the case so far. With the 
melting of the ice, if the Arctic route were to remain ice-free for more 
than six months of the year in the future, this rule would automatically 
lapse, depriving Arctic countries of the right to block passage or 
impose tolls under international law.
The year-round opening of the Arctic route could change the geopolitical 
balance of maritime trade. Russia, by controlling the route, would 
strengthen its strategic position, while its partner China could, 
together with Moscow, exploit the shipping lanes and the vast oil and 
gas deposits beneath the permafrost, as well as promote technological 
and digital collaboration.
In this scenario, Greenland emerges as a key target for the United 
States. Controlling the island would mean curbing Russian and Chinese 
ambitions, securing passage along the Western Arctic route, and 
accessing valuable resources. It is no coincidence that Washington, 
after historic attempts in the 19th and 20th centuries, recently 
reaffirmed its interest in purchasing the island, confirming the United 
States' strategic focus on the Arctic.
For the record, it should be noted that the United States has long had a 
military presence in Greenland. Several bases have been built over the 
years, including the Pituffik Space Base, also known as Thule Air Base, 
which is still operational. This installation houses the BMEWS radar 
system, crucial for the early detection and interception of potential 
missile attacks targeting US territory.
In this scenario, Europe risks being a passive spectator, unable to 
formulate its own strategic line. The Meloni government's "Italian 
Arctic Strategy" is yet another example of how each European country 
(Italy included) is moving forward on its own, systematically creating 
"short circuits" between different national interests.
Overcoming the Profit Logic
The competition over the Arctic and new trade routes is yet another 
manifestation of the crisis of global capitalism and its inherent 
predatory nature. Behind the declarations of Trump and US nationalists, 
as well as the strategies of Moscow, Beijing, and Brussels, lies the 
same logic: geopolitical control of strategic territories and the 
private appropriation of essential resources. Greenland, rare earths, 
oil, and gas thus become pawns in an economic war between powers, while 
social and environmental needs are systematically sacrificed to the 
interests of the ruling classes.
This race for the Arctic is not about collective security or the 
well-being of populations, but about defending profits and imperial 
hegemony in a world marked by growing inequality and the climate crisis. 
Only by questioning the primacy of the state as an instrument of power 
and the market as the sole criterion for resource management is it 
possible to imagine an alternative. An Arctic freed from the logic of 
competition and militarization could become a space of cooperation and 
collective use, where natural and technological resources are oriented 
toward social and environmental justice, rather than the strengthening 
of a few centers of power.
Notes
Sara Brugnoni (ed.), There's already a major US military base in 
Greenland: what is the Pituffik Space Base and where is it located, 
«Geopop», 09/01/2026 
(https://www.geopop.it/in-groenlandia-ce-gia-unimportante-base-militare-usa-cose-la-pituffik-space-base-e-dove-si-trova).
Mario Platero, Trump is not the first US president to want Greenland: 
the island has been a Washington obsession for over 200 years, «Corriere 
della Sera», 19/01/2026 
(https://www.corriere.it/esteri/26_gennaio_19/trump-groenlandia-presidenti-usa-faf61b41-16e8-4bc5-bb85-10e0e6113xlk.shtml).
Fabio Ricceri, "The Great Arctic Game: Trump, Greenland, and the Future 
of Global Trade Routes. The Role of Russia and China," Rivista.AI, 
January 12, 2025 
(https://www.rivista.ai/2025/01/12/il-grande-gioco-dellartico-trump-la-groenlandia-e-il-futuro-delle-rotte-commerciali-globali-il-ruolo-di-russia-e-cina).
Greenland, Wikipedia (https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Groenlandia).
Greenland and the Arctic, Italy prepares its strategy: from rare earths 
to oil, the opportunities, «Adnkronos», 17/01/2026 
(https://www.adnkronos.com/economia/groenlandia-piano-italia-artico-cosa-prevede_?5rCdFNn6vfSRlvYmjH17T9).

https://alternativalibertaria.fdca.it/wpAL/
_________________________________________
A - I N F O S  N E W S  S E R V I C E
By, For, and About Anarchists
Send news reports to A-infos-en mailing list
A-infos-en@ainfos.ca
Subscribe/Unsubscribe https://ainfos.ca/mailman/listinfo/a-infos-en
Archive: http://ainfos.ca/en