It is not often that British opposition leader Kemi Badenoch says, ‘I agree with Keir Starmer.’ Without adding, ‘Yes, but...’
In Westminster, this is almost a minor constitutional breach. After all, Badenoch is the leader of the Conservative Party and Starmer is the Labour Party leader. In the United Kingdom, the government and the opposition usually argue like cats and dogs. They are not supposed to agree. If they do, something bigger than party politics must have happened.
And indeed, US President Donald Trump is threatening Europeans with punitive tariffs because he is not getting Greenland.
What sounds like a grotesque footnote in the history of presidential whims is a tangible attack on the architecture of world trade. In this logic, tariffs are not a regulatory instrument, but a thumb screw: tighten today, loosen tomorrow, depending on the mood in the Oval Office. But that is not how the global economic order works.
A real estate company does not buy a huge ice floe for billions just to pick a fight with all its neighbours. It secures a local presence. And that is exactly what the US already has: no one is stopping Washington from establishing new military bases in Greenland. During the Cold War, around 6,000 American soldiers were stationed there; today, there are just 150.
So the deal is obvious: the US does not need to own Greenland. It already has access – without purchase costs, without lease, without diplomatic concessions. A security policy right of use at no cost.
(A shortened, slightly redacted and translated
Spiegel opinion)