Why does Trump want to buy Greenland?

Published Jan 12, 2025, 6:00 PM

So, Donald Trump wants to expand the United States - in a big way. But why is he considering seizing Greenland, of all places - and by military force, no less? And why does he want to reclaim the Panama Canal, and absorb Canada?

Trump’s comments aren’t just, as one commentator put it, “untethered from international law”. They’ve also angered many world leaders. And made others laugh. One president responded with a troll of her own.

Today, North America correspondent Farrah Tomazin, on what this all means, for the next four years. And what the history of American domination over other parts of the globe can teach us.

From the newsrooms of the Sydney Morning Herald and The Age. This is the morning edition. I'm Samantha Selinger Morris. It's Monday, January 13th. So Donald Trump wants to expand the United States in a big way. But why is he considering seizing Greenland of all places and by military force, no less? And why does he want to reclaim the Panama Canal and absorb Canada? Trump's comments aren't just, as one commentator put it, untethered from international law. They've also angered many world leaders and made others laugh. One president responded with a troll of her own today. North America correspondent Farrah Tomazin on what this all means for the next four years, and what the history of American domination over other parts of the globe can teach us. So far, we've heard some pretty wild proposals from president elect Donald Trump last week. Can you just remind us briefly about what he said?

So Donald Trump held this one hour press conference at his Mar a Lago resort last week. And it was, I think, the only the second press conference he's had since he was elected in November. And the premise of it was pretty much to announce, you know, new investment in the United States.

Thank you very much. It's an honor to be with you. Many things are happening.

But it wasn't long before Trump once again veered on to a whole range of like, wild topics. The most notable was his push to expand America's global footprint by seizing a bunch of territories, potentially even by military force. The first of those places that we heard about was the Panama Canal.

Giving the Panama Canal is why Jimmy Carter lost the election. In my opinion, that was a big mistake. Giving the Panama Canal.

The second place was Greenland, which is this sort of vast ice covered island of about, I think 56,000 people.

They should give it up because we need it for national security. That's for the free world. I'm talking about protecting the free world.

It used to be part of Denmark, but it's in an autonomous territory now. And he also threw in Canada, basically saying that he would use economic coercion to pressure Canada to become part of the US.

Because Canada and the United States, that would really be something you get rid of that artificially drawn line and you take a look at what that looks like.

In addition to that, he also suggested that he would rename the Gulf of Mexico, which is the big ocean basin spanning from the eastern coast of Mexico, which to the south east coast of the US. And he suggested he would name that the Gulf of America. So it was a pretty, you know, wild, meandering, rambling press conference. He said a bunch of wild things. But his comments, I think, on territorial expansion would probably the wildest, given he's got about a week or so until he's sworn in as the 47th president of the United States, and all eyes will be on what he does, particularly in terms of foreign policy.

Elect Donald Trump is starting off the New year by threatening to take over a bunch of foreign countries right before he gets sentenced for a felony.

Conviction, suggesting that we might buy or just claim Greenland, which seemed like a joke the first time he floated this idea. But this time he isn't just talking about it.

Okay, so this was wild. Trump's obviously talking about huge swaths of territory in all different parts of the world. Let's start with Greenland. Why does Trump want to buy Greenland off of Denmark? Because it is still under the realm of the Kingdom of Denmark. Because I imagine many listeners are like me and have no idea what relationship the US has with Greenland.

So Greenland is a territory that Trump has been interested in for a while, and it's strategically significant, I guess, for a number of reasons. Last month, he renewed those calls in a Truth Social post where he basically said that, you know, ownership and control of Greenland was, quote, absolutely essential for national security. It's worth noting that the US does have does have an air base there. So it's sort of this key installation for missile detection and space surveillance. But acquiring Greenland would strengthen US influence in the Arctic. And I guess to that extent help America counter the growing presence of other superpowers, namely Russia and China, in the region. Greenland is also rich in natural resources, so rare earth minerals, oil, gas, other valuable commodities. So I imagine Trump likely saw economic potential in tapping into some of those resources. And he also said at his press conference that he could help the US track Chinese and Russian ships, which he said are quote unquote, all over the place. It's probably worth noting that in recent years, you know, Russia opened dozens of like, Soviet military bases in the Arctic as tensions kind of worsened with the West over Ukraine. China's pursued expanding shipping routes around there and exploiting critical minerals, which, as we know, can be used in everything from phones to electric cars and military equipment. So naturally, I guess Trump wants in.

And I was surprised to find out that former American President Harry Truman, back in the 1940s, actually made an offer to buy Greenland off Denmark. So this in particular isn't even unprecedented. I don't my understanding is he didn't actually threaten any sort of military aggression, but that actually buying Greenland is not a new idea.

No, it doesn't seem to be a new idea. I mean, as you say, Harry Truman obviously, you know, made made that push some time ago. Um, but, you know, the fundamental difference is military, the idea of military aggression to take over the territory, the sovereign territory of another land is quite, is quite something quite unique, very akin to what what Vladimir Putin has sought to do over, over Ukraine. Um, so it's going to be really, really fascinating to watch.

Okay, so let's turn to Canada then. You know, we're talking about a country here that is a huge trading partner with the US. It's a military ally. And the United States and Canada also share the longest undefended border in the world. So why does Trump want Canada?

Well, that's a very good question. He's been making a lot of jokes lately about Canada becoming America's 51st state. And a lot of those jokes were really to troll Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, who Trump would often refer to as the governor of what could soon be America's 51st state. Now, Trudeau, as we know, is about to step down. He's obviously bowing to a lot of public and internal pressure over his leadership. Um, but even after Trudeau announced that he was going to resign, Trump doubled down on his comments about Canada at this press conference by threatening to use economic force, presumably in the form of tariffs and whatnot, to merge the two countries. Once again, he claimed, in the interest of national security, um, he then even continued this push early into the evening, he was posting maps on social media showing Canada as part of the United States with the words oh, Canada. Um, he even suggested that the, um, the hockey great Wayne Gretzky should run for prime minister of the country, although he said that his title shouldn't be prime minister, should actually be governor. Um, so, look, it's it's a bizarre sort of suggestion because, as you say, the US and Canada have been really big military and economic partners for some time. You know, the US and Canadian auto industries, for example, are closely linked. Um, NORAD, which is the combined American and Canadian defense early warning system, is run equally by the two allies. And that sort of lies at the heart of American air and missile defence. Both countries are also part of NATO, as we know. So they've aligned military there as well. I mean, that aside, though, Trump has frequently criticized Canada over immigration and trade. I mean, if you look at Canada, um, and you probably know this as a Canadian. Canada is rich in natural resources. It's got oil, it's got gas, it's got timber, and it's got, you know, pretty good agriculture and significant freshwater reserves. And if merj, which is very unlikely to happen, it could create a bit of an economic powerhouse with the US.

And just to follow up there, you know, you said that Trump said that part of the reason he wanted Canada was for was for safety reasons. So what was the explanation there?

Well, I mean, I guess national security Trumps also had a big gripe with Canada over illegal immigration. After he was elected, he threatened to slap, I think it was 25% tariffs on Canada and Mexico unless they crack down on drugs and illegal immigrants. I think he's sort of argument was basically, you know, if you merge these two countries together, you'll have, you know, a far better kind of, you know, defense system in place. You'll you'll have you can create an economic powerhouse against the other powerhouses of Russia and China. But I guess it's something we'll watch and see.

Okay, let's turn to the Panama Canal, because this seems so random. I don't think many of us have heard much about the Panama Canal in decades. So why does Trump want it now?

The Panama Canal is basically controlled by the Panamanian government. It's this artificial 82 kilometer waterway in Panama that's vital to international maritime trade between the Atlantic and the Pacific oceans. Just a bit of the backstory. The US helped build it, and it controlled the canal after its construction in the early 20th century. But over time, you know, there were tensions over America's possession. There was sort of this growing nationalist sentiment in Panama, and that led to then President Jimmy Carter negotiating the end of US control. He signed a treaty back in 1977 with the Panamanian general, at the time.

President of the Estados Unidos de América, Jimmy Carter. First of all, I want to.

Express my deep thanks to the leaders.

And that basically transferred the waterway to Panama in 1999. Under the terms of that treaty.

Panama will play an increasingly important role in the operation and defense of the canal during the next 23 years.

Having said that, it remains a really strategically significant, um, point for the US. I think about 5% or thereabouts of global trade passes through it. US companies and consumers benefit from it. It shortens travel times. It reduces costs for goods moving between the coasts. But then, of course, there's this ever constant threat of Beijing. I mean, Trump has claimed that China is seeking to assert more control over the area, and he's obviously wary of China's influence in Latin America. So he's probably, you know, viewed control of the canal as critical to countering Beijing's expanding global footprint. And Chinese investment in the area. On top of that, there's been, you know, severe drought in recent years. It's led to lower water levels, as I understand it, in the canal that's endangered the passage. It's ensured that, you know, the government authority that runs the area has jacked up fees. And that's another thing that Trump complained about. He basically described those fees as, to use his words, ridiculous and highly unfair. Um, so he's not happy about that. And I must say, the Panamanian president rejected those claims, basically saying that, you know, the fees of applying equitably to all nations. But certainly Trump, who, you know, has a keen eye on all things money and does not like the United States being ripped off, ripped off in any way, shape or form, um, has made that part of his argument as well.

We'll be right back. I want to turn now to what pushback we've heard from the leaders of these nations that Trump says he wants to take over. I mean, some by military force. This is obviously so aggressive. One would imagine this would make relations really tense. So what have we heard?

Well, you would not be surprised to know that the nations in question have not been particularly happy about it. Outgoing Canadian PM Justin Trudeau made the point that there isn't a snowball's chance in hell that Canada would become part of the United States in terms of Greenland. The Danish prime minister told Danish television that, you know, Greenland's not up for grabs, but, you know, she welcomed increased US role in the region, given moves by some of the other power players. You know, like Russia in the area. Other Danish officials basically called Trump disrespectful. Denmark's king even changed the coat of arms to feature a symbol of Greenland to feature that symbol more prominently, which some saw as a bit of a rebuke to Trump's aspirations. Well, German.

Chancellor Olaf Scholz says EU leaders are baffled after U.S. president elect Donald Trump refused to rule out military action to gain control of Greenland.

The principle of the inviolability of borders applies to every country, whether it lies east or west of us.

And we've also seen Claudia Sheinbaum, Mexico's president, respond to his proposal to rename the Gulf of Mexico the Gulf of America. She responded to that with a proposal to rename North America America mexicana. So it's it's all fun all fun and games in geopolitics at the moment, but it's fair to say that world leaders have not been particularly impressed with Trump's musings.

And it is a tricky situation.

Though, isn't it, for some of these leaders? Because, you know, I did I did note with interest that comment by the Danish prime minister who told Danish TV, like you say, Greenland is not for sale. But you know, Denmark needs this close cooperation with the US because it's a NATO ally. So that's that's tricky, right? I guess a tricky line to walk.

Yeah. It is. I mean, and also, you know, America is, uh, the big kind of superpower, and Donald Trump is not somebody that you kind of want to cross. So I guess they've all got to find this sort of balance. Um, I mean, it's going to be interesting to see, I suppose, how serious Trump is about all of this. I mean, I noticed Secretary of State Antony Blinken, you know, he basically argued that a lot of this stuff is unlikely to happen anyway. So why are we wasting time talking about it? Others have made the point that, you know, sometimes Trump just says stuff to sort of distract Americans from the fact that their grocery prices aren't likely to go down anytime soon, or that other promises that he, you know, took to the election, uh, aren't aren't likely to happen. So it's certainly going to make for a fascinating thing to watch over the next couple of, uh, couple of weeks and months. And I can.

Understand that that frustration from people thinking that this is just, you know, Trump punking us, really, because it is such a move of his to sort of distract from real world problems and get us to go crazy about this really inflammatory stuff. But but then I did see one commentator point out that the case that Trump is making for taking over the Panama Canal, you know, namely by justifying it by complaining about how American shipping has been treated and they're being charged unfairly, that that actually echoes the justifications that Vladimir Putin has made for invading Ukraine. I mean, that's not a comparison we're used to hearing about the leader of the United States, is it?

No, it's you know, it's a sort of somewhat troubling comparison. I mean, we've all seen what happened with, uh, Russia and Ukraine. Um, and look, I guess with this stuff, though, there is a bit of a bit of historical context. I mean, the US has had a history of acquiring land for strategic and economic purposes. Um, we've had things like the Louisiana Purchase, which is basically where the US acquired a massive tract of land west of the Mississippi River that once belonged to France. It had the acquisition of Alaska. Trump might have viewed Greenland as a similar opportunity. The rhetoric that he's sort of been given, the aggressive, assertive sort of rhetoric is also reminiscent, I think, of the kind of aggression we saw in the late 19th century when, um, the then American president, William McKinley, presided over the Spanish American Civil War. And it basically got the US control of Hawaii, Guam, the Philippines, Puerto Rico. And I think, as others have pointed out, Trump comes to American foreign policy with, you know, the mind of a of a real estate developer from Manhattan. You know, he has a desire for for grabbing territory, whether it be in the form of, you know, casinos or buildings or homes or whatnot. You just you just never know with, Donald Trump. But you're right, it is not a comparison that we're used to hearing about the leader of the, uh, of the United States.

And we're so lucky to be speaking to you because you are in Washington. So what is the feeling there, like is the feeling that, you know, Trump might very well just change his mind on, on, on this tomorrow because obviously he says wacky things. Or is the feeling more like, well, he's actually going to be president in a week and we need to take this seriously, especially because, you know, in the case of Greenland and the Panama Canal, he hasn't actually ruled out using military force. You know, if he if he sees it necessary to sort of reclaim those spots.

I think a lot of people here around Washington are, you know, a bit uneasy about what's to come over the next few months, let alone the next 2 to 4 years. And I personally think we should not just dismiss the crazy things that he says as Trump being Trump. Yes, he is. He's sort of like, you know, prone to bravado and bluster. But you've got to remember he's coming into this presidency, this 2.0 presidency, more emboldened than ever before. He won all seven battleground states. He won unified control of the US House and the Senate. So he genuinely does believe and that Republicans I've spoken to around him really do believe, that he's got a mandate to do what he thinks is in the best interest of the American people. The other thing we've also got to remember is that his first administration, right, he had people around him who didn't always necessarily agree with him, and they were willing to provide some sort of checks and balances on on his worst impulses. And that was the thing that kind of frustrated him greatly in those first few months when things looked kind of chaotic in Trump 1.0. Now, as we've all seen, he's stacking the white House and his cabinet with loyalists who who are going to do his bidding and who are not likely to push back like they did under his first presidency. So it will be absolutely fascinating to watch how this plays out over the next few months. So yeah, hold on Hold on to your hats, folks.

Thank you so much for your time.

You're very, very welcome.

Today's episode of The Morning Edition was produced by Julia Carcasole with technical assistance by Kai Wong. Our executive producer is Tammy Mills. Our head of audio is Tom McKendrick. The Morning Edition is a production of The Age and The Sydney Morning Herald. If you enjoy the show and want more of our journalism. Subscribe to our newspapers today. It's the best way to support what we do. Search the Age or Smh.com.au. Subscribe and sign up for our Morning Edition newsletter to receive a comprehensive summary of the day's most important news, analysis and insights in your inbox every day. Links are in the show. Notes. I'm Samantha Selinger. Morris. This is the morning edition. Thanks for listening.