Speaker 1: Bloomberg Audio Studios, podcasts, radio news.
Speaker 2: We start getting emails, we start hearing things that the
Speaker 2: President has started making comments about Greenland.
Speaker 3: President Donald Trump has wanted to gain control of Greenland
Speaker 3: for years, and after the raid on Venezuela and the
Speaker 3: capture of President Nicholas Maduro on Saturday, Trump started talking
Speaker 3: about the idea again.
Speaker 4: We need Greenland from the standpoint of national security, and
Speaker 4: Denmark is not going to be able to do it.
Speaker 5: I can tell you.
Speaker 3: Other figures in Trump's orbit started talking about Greenland too.
Speaker 2: Stephen Miller, who works in the White House his wife
Speaker 2: Katie Miller, tweeted out a picture of Greenland with an
Speaker 2: American flag draped all over it, which stirred up a
Speaker 2: lot of controversy, and then Stephen Miller himself came on later.
Speaker 2: I believe this is on CNN with one of the reporters,
Speaker 2: Chike Tapper.
Speaker 6: So I know you're treating this as breaking news. The
Speaker 6: President has been clear for a month now that the
Speaker 6: United States should be the nation that has Greenland is
Speaker 6: part of our overall security apparatus.
Speaker 3: Some Trump administration officials have since tried to walk back
Speaker 3: some of the most aggressive rhetoric. Secretary of State Marco
Speaker 3: Rubio told Will Macers the goal is to buy Greenland
Speaker 3: from Denmark, but it's a hard belt to unring.
Speaker 1: I think the fact that these comments came right after
Speaker 1: the raid on Venezuela that got officials in Denmark and
Speaker 1: Greenland they really worried.
Speaker 3: Sonovas covers the economy and politics of Denmark and Greenland
Speaker 3: from Bloomberg's Copenhagen Bureau. She says the substance and the
Speaker 3: timing of the Trump administration's Greenland comments are being taken
Speaker 3: very seriously by officials across Europe who are members of
Speaker 3: the NATO Joint Defense Pact alongside the US.
Speaker 1: Suddenly it's gotten Europe worried because Greenland kind of could
Speaker 1: fall on too. Donald trum reinterpretation of the Monroe Doctrine
Speaker 1: Benjuela illustrated to everyone that Trump.
Speaker 5: Is willing to do things we thought he wouldn't do.
Speaker 1: He's willing to break international law to achieve his aims.
Speaker 2: The question has been now for years, is that really
Speaker 2: what they want to do? Here gets a fair conversation
Speaker 2: to have, especially from the point of view from Danish officials,
Speaker 2: like if one day you wake up and the President
Speaker 2: of the United States is saying, we want to own
Speaker 2: this territory that is actually under your flag.
Speaker 3: Right, It's not just rhetoric to that.
Speaker 2: It's not just yea. Words mean something like even if
Speaker 2: Donald Trump is loose with words, they always mean something.
Speaker 3: Jodo covers economic and corporate state craft for Bloomberg. He
Speaker 3: spent a lot of time reporting on Greenland.
Speaker 2: You have the Danish premiere saying if there's an attack
Speaker 2: that would effectively end NATO. So you're starting to get
Speaker 2: into the territory that like, if we take this all
Speaker 2: very very seriously, I mean, this are some massive, massive issues.
Speaker 3: I'm Sarah Holder, and this is the big take from
Speaker 3: Bloomberg News today on the show, with the US attack
Speaker 3: in Venezuela, an escalating White House rhetoric mean for Greenland,
Speaker 3: and where it all leaves NATO as it faces the
Speaker 3: prospect of a newly emboldened Russia. Donald Trump has been
Speaker 3: talking about taking over Greenland since twenty nineteen, when he
Speaker 3: first floated the idea of the US buying the island
Speaker 3: as part of a large real estate deal, and he
Speaker 3: picked back up at the beginning of his second term.
Speaker 4: And I also have a message tonight for the incredible
Speaker 4: people of Greenland. We strongly support your right to determine
Speaker 4: your own future, and if you choose, we welcome you
Speaker 4: into the United States of America. We need.
Speaker 3: In his dressed to Congress in March twenty twenty five,
Speaker 3: Trump made clear that having control of Greenland was still
Speaker 3: a priority.
Speaker 4: One way or the other, We're going to get it.
Speaker 3: I asked Bloomberg, Son of US, and Joe Doe to
Speaker 3: remind us why Trump is so interested in Greenland.
Speaker 1: Officially, Trump says it's all about US national security. The
Speaker 1: island basically sits right between the North Atlantic and the Arctic,
Speaker 1: and it essentially puts it right in the front line
Speaker 1: between US and Russia.
Speaker 3: The US already does have a military base in Greenland,
Speaker 3: and it's had a presence there for decades.
Speaker 1: The US had dozens of installations military installations in Greenland
Speaker 1: during the Cold War.
Speaker 5: And then decided to scale back.
Speaker 1: What's changed now is climate change. For one thing, the
Speaker 1: Arctic ice is melting. It's opening up to new sea routes,
Speaker 1: but also potentially hostile ships and submarines having easier access
Speaker 1: to move through the region. Russia and China they are
Speaker 1: expanding their Arctic presence, and Trump really sees Greenland as
Speaker 1: a potential weak spot in the nation's defense.
Speaker 2: The melting of the ice caps, right and kind of
Speaker 2: the freeing up of essentially the Arctic Circle is absolutely
Speaker 2: critical here, and I think from a defense department, from
Speaker 2: a Pentagon perspective, is that is mission critical.
Speaker 3: And the US could conceivably just set up more military
Speaker 3: bases in Greenland, right. They have a fairly easy path
Speaker 3: to do that under this nineteen fifty one treaty with Denmark.
Speaker 3: Why doesn't the administration see that as enough from a
Speaker 3: national security standpoint?
Speaker 1: I mean, that's the question that Danish officials and Greenlandic
Speaker 1: officials have been asking all along. Their point is that
Speaker 1: the US can achieve their aims in terms of national
Speaker 1: security without taking control of Greenland. All it has to
Speaker 1: do is come and set up a more military basis.
Speaker 1: All it has to do is talk to Denmark about
Speaker 1: what it is that it needs there, or talk to
Speaker 1: Greenland as well about the possibilities and.
Speaker 3: Joe, so, what are some of the other reasons that
Speaker 3: Greenland might be strategically interesting to the Trump administration?
Speaker 2: So critical minerals have been a key priority of his
Speaker 2: current administration. You marry that key priority with the fact
Speaker 2: that there is a wealth of critical minerals in Greenland.
Speaker 2: It's nearly impossible to unlock at commercial scale right now,
Speaker 2: but you've had a number of people trying to work
Speaker 2: out a way to make that work. I mean, the
Speaker 2: majority of the island is permafrost. You can't build anything
Speaker 2: in permafrost. I think what you have is there's a
Speaker 2: defense angle, there's a national security angle that's very real,
Speaker 2: and then you also have people trying to find out
Speaker 2: how to make a profit, right, you know. I think
Speaker 2: on some of you just have people saying, Okay, well
Speaker 2: let's see if you can get ours, and it's so crude,
Speaker 2: but I think it's important to point out to people
Speaker 2: that that's out there as well. I mean, you're seeing
Speaker 2: it with Venezuela, You're seeing it with Ukraine. There is
Speaker 2: money behind all of this.
Speaker 3: We've heard a lot of variations from the Trump administration
Speaker 3: about how they could actually bring Greenland closer. There's the
Speaker 3: option of force business deals. Trump urged Greenland's voters to
Speaker 3: choose the United States.
Speaker 2: People in Greenland, many of them say, you know, listen,
Speaker 2: some sort of independence sounds like a good idea. We'd
Speaker 2: like that. But the idea that like we would trade
Speaker 2: one European nation for a North American nation who quote
Speaker 2: unquote rules US, that's equally as bad.
Speaker 3: Right, If they want independence, they want independence. Is there
Speaker 3: a new specific plan here that's emerging, Joe, what is
Speaker 3: your latest reporting on how the US might pursue closer
Speaker 3: ties with Greenland or a potential takeover.
Speaker 2: My reporting so far has shown, according to people familiar,
Speaker 2: nothing is changed, nothing's changed. Donald Trump mentioned Greenland again
Speaker 2: a month ago. I was in Washington, DC catching up
Speaker 2: with my sources there and I asked, among the many questions,
Speaker 2: this was very much the end of the conversation type
Speaker 2: of questions to these sources, who would know where is
Speaker 2: Greenland right now in the pile of priorities? And the
Speaker 2: overwhelming response was Greenland. I mean, it's at the bottom
Speaker 2: of the pile. Nobody's talking about it right now. And
Speaker 2: now he's mentioned it multiple times in the past week.
Speaker 2: So in less than a month, we went from like
Speaker 2: this is not a priority of the administration, they're not
Speaker 2: talking about it to Donald Trump is talking about it
Speaker 2: seemingly every day, and we go back to the reporting
Speaker 2: that we had, which was when he announced it, White
Speaker 2: House staffers were scrambling. You know, you got to present
Speaker 2: something to Donald Trump, to the President of the United States,
Speaker 2: when he says, I've got a thing behind this.
Speaker 3: Okay, So your latest reporting is that what these officials
Speaker 3: are looking to present our potential business deals that could
Speaker 3: give the US a greater footprint on the island, like
Speaker 3: rare earth minerals, mining projects, or hydro electric power ventures.
Speaker 3: And at the same time, Rubio reportedly told lawmakers this
Speaker 3: week that the US wants to buy Greenland. How could
Speaker 3: something like that even work?
Speaker 2: Well, first of all, for a transaction to happen, you
Speaker 2: have to have the a seller and a buyer who
Speaker 2: are both willing to transact. And right now, Denmark has
Speaker 2: made it very clear that they're not a willing seller.
Speaker 2: So if this, if the supposed seller is not even
Speaker 2: at the table, like, then there's no transaction that can occur.
Speaker 2: And if we go back to this idea that like
Speaker 2: the US is not going to use force, then we're
Speaker 2: just kind of at the same standstill that we've been
Speaker 2: the whole time. You know, I guess the two be
Speaker 2: sure on this, is it goes back to the Stephen
Speaker 2: Miller interview where he said, you know, basically like we're
Speaker 2: not taking anything off the table here, right, But then
Speaker 2: he also said, and why would we take Greenland by force?
Speaker 2: If we want it, we don't have to take it
Speaker 2: by force, with the idea being that you just show
Speaker 2: up on the shores and you just say, okay, it's
Speaker 2: ours now, you know, assuming that nobody is going to resist.
Speaker 2: I mean, then I don't know, you get into such
Speaker 2: uncharted territory. It's such a hypothetical, it's almost like dangerous
Speaker 2: to even like contemplate what we're talking about here.
Speaker 3: Yeah, But on Tuesday night, the White House issued the
Speaker 3: statement saying, quote utilizing the US military is always an
Speaker 3: option unquote when it comes to Greenland. Sona, What are
Speaker 3: we hearing from Danish officials about all of this, How
Speaker 3: are they interpreting the White House's intentions, and what path
Speaker 3: forward do they see as the most likely at this stage.
Speaker 5: They've reacted very strongly.
Speaker 1: I mean, the Danish Prime Minister has been out several
Speaker 1: times in the past week telling Trump to stop issuing
Speaker 1: threats against Greenland, reiterating previous points that it is up
Speaker 1: to Greenland to decide its own future. At this stage,
Speaker 1: Danish officials hope that they can talk to Trump and
Speaker 1: dismantle some of the arguments that he has for taking
Speaker 1: control of Greenland. They believe that Trump is painting a
Speaker 1: completely wrong picture of the situation. Trump has said that
Speaker 1: Chinese and Russian ships are everywhere around Greenland.
Speaker 5: Denmark says that's wrong.
Speaker 1: Trump has said that Denmark hasn't invested in Greenland's defenses.
Speaker 1: Denmark says that's wrong too. So they're really hoping that
Speaker 1: they can help clarify things and talk about a diplomatic
Speaker 1: solution going forward. It could be that they would enter
Speaker 1: a deal over the US expanding its military presence in
Speaker 1: Greenland under existing treaties, so he could do that without
Speaker 1: getting into too much trouble with NATO. That's not a
Speaker 1: scenario that Danish officials are necessarily hoping for, but they
Speaker 1: have said that they're open to the US expanding of
Speaker 1: boosting its presence in Greenland.
Speaker 3: There's an idea coming from the Trump administration that a
Speaker 3: US takeover of Greenland would benefit NATO, the Western military
Speaker 3: alliance intended to keep Russia in check. Stephen Miller made
Speaker 3: that case to CNN's Jake Tapper, the.
Speaker 6: United States is the power of NATO, for the United
Speaker 6: States to secure the Arctic region, to protect and defend
Speaker 6: NATO and NATO interest. Obviously Greenland should be part of
Speaker 6: the United States. And so that's a conversation that we're
Speaker 6: going to have.
Speaker 3: After the break. How NATO is responding to the White
Speaker 3: House's Greenland messaging and what it all means for European
Speaker 3: security and global geopolitics. In the more than seventy five
Speaker 3: years since NATO's creation, never has one member threatened to
Speaker 3: take territory from another, So Bloomberg, Son of US, says,
Speaker 3: the White House's comments about a US takeover of Greenland
Speaker 3: have raised existential questions for NATO.
Speaker 1: Danish Prime Minister metaphors and has said if Trump decides
Speaker 1: to attack a NATO ally, that.
Speaker 5: Would essentially mean the end to NATO.
Speaker 1: What I also think is happening now is that Trump
Speaker 1: is really testing EU unity, European unity. Big question mark
Speaker 1: is what happens if he actually moves into Greenland. It
Speaker 1: would force Denmark to turn to its EU partners for support,
Speaker 1: but essentially then force European countries to choose between protecting
Speaker 1: Greenland or maintaining relationships with Washington, and Europe doesn't really
Speaker 1: have the military strength to take on the US, so
Speaker 1: it would create a mass dilemma for many countries and
Speaker 1: it would really really test the EU's strength and unity.
Speaker 3: I mean, even if the US's rhetoric doesn't rise to
Speaker 3: the level of military action, what kind of damage or
Speaker 3: questions has this raised for the organization moving forward?
Speaker 1: I mean, in Denmark there is a big frustration that
Speaker 1: NATO countries are focusing all the energy on these internal conflicts.
Speaker 1: I'm sure Putin is following this closely on the sideline
Speaker 1: and just waiting for NATO to completely break down. Even
Speaker 1: if Trump doesn't do anything about Greenland, the threat is
Speaker 1: just creating internal conflict that will be an advantage for him.
Speaker 1: And Denmark has faced a lot of issues Russia's shadow
Speaker 1: fleet and drone attacks that is now being investigated as
Speaker 1: possibly coming from Russia.
Speaker 3: Russia is obviously under its own pressure for its incursions
Speaker 3: into Ukraine. How is Russia reading this? Does it embolden Russia?
Speaker 2: I think there's probably a couple of ways to look
Speaker 2: at it, which is one, there's a vacuum where Putin
Speaker 2: sees this as some sort of justification that you can
Speaker 2: kind of do what you want to do. I think
Speaker 2: this was a concern among you know, geopolitical experts in
Speaker 2: the weekend over the US removing Maduro from physically removing
Speaker 2: this man from from Venezuela. I think there's another world
Speaker 2: where you look at it from like the Donald Trump
Speaker 2: hawk point of view, which is we are flexing muscle
Speaker 2: and showing our power, you know, all the way down
Speaker 2: to our special ops.
Speaker 4: Right.
Speaker 2: I mean, this is kind of an incredible extraction since
Speaker 2: the signal to Vladimir Putin and in Russia. I mean,
Speaker 2: I think Donald Trump, even during his first term, he
Speaker 2: uses kind of a strong man rhetoric, right, and he's
Speaker 2: also an in some ways back to that up right,
Speaker 2: the bombings of Iran back in the summer. This action, right,
Speaker 2: on some level, it does show to important power players
Speaker 2: what the United States is capable of. Does it work?
Speaker 2: I don't know, Santa.
Speaker 3: For Greenland, where do things go from here?
Speaker 5: Denmark and Greenland.
Speaker 1: Now they've asked Marco Rubeu for a meeting, and that's
Speaker 1: for sure something that we'll be following. According to greenlandic officials,
Speaker 1: they've been trying to get a meeting with him for
Speaker 1: the past year, but without any luck. I mean Greenland's
Speaker 1: Prime Minister yainsphag Nielson. He's been out telling his people
Speaker 1: not to panic. He has said that Trump's comments are
Speaker 1: disrespectful and unacceptable, and he has also made it very
Speaker 1: clear that Greenland does not want to become a part
Speaker 1: of the US, and most a large majority of Greenlanders
Speaker 1: agree with him on that.
Speaker 5: But he's clearly also training carefully.
Speaker 1: And in his statements it keeps on saying we are
Speaker 1: open to dialogue, We're open to business. The Greenlandic economy
Speaker 1: it is understrained. They would really like to trade more
Speaker 1: with the US, They would like to get more investments
Speaker 1: from the US, so they may also Greenlanders may also
Speaker 1: see maybe some opportunities not to give up control of
Speaker 1: their country, but to enter some deals and actually gain
Speaker 1: some economic benefits that way. The biggest challenge to this
Speaker 1: happening now is that Donald Trump's threats have made Greenlanders afraid,
Speaker 1: so it's really making it challenging for Greenlandic politicians to
Speaker 1: enter into any negotiations dialogue with Donald Trump.
Speaker 2: Denmark has said, we will do what we need to do.
Speaker 2: You tell us you can put more bases on Greenland.
Speaker 2: Just talk to us about it. I do think we're
Speaker 2: in uncharted territory and you do have to start kind
Speaker 2: of connecting dots because like Donald Trump himself is not
Speaker 2: telling us. And I mean, as our reporting says, like
Speaker 2: it seems like White House staffers don't even really know.
Speaker 2: So how are how are we?
Speaker 3: Like?
Speaker 2: How is anyone else gonna know?
Speaker 3: This is the Big Take from Bloomberg News. I'm Sarah Holder.
Speaker 3: To get more from the Big Take and unlimited access
Speaker 3: to all of Bloomberg dot com, subscribe today at Bloomberg
Speaker 3: dot com Slash podcast offer. Thanks for listening. We'll be
Speaker 3: back tomorrow