Why Trump Making Greenland Part of the US Would Benefit Russia: Fracturing the West - It legitimizes Russia’s own territorial logic,...

Strategic Context (Why Greenland matters at all)

by ChatGPT-5.2

Greenland sits at the geostrategic choke-point between:

• North America

• Europe

• The Arctic

• The North Atlantic (GIUK gap: Greenland–Iceland–UK)

It matters for:

• Early-warning missile defense

• Arctic shipping routes

• Rare earths & critical minerals

• NATO cohesion

• US–Russia nuclear deterrence stability

1. The biggest benefit to Russia: fracturing the West

If the US attempted to annex or coerce Greenland (currently part of the Kingdom of Denmark), it would:

• Undermine Danish sovereignty

• Violate post-WWII norms against territorial acquisition

• Trigger a constitutional crisis inside NATO

• Force Europe to choose between Washington and Copenhagen

That’s a dream outcome for Moscow.

Russia’s long-term objective is not conquest of the West—it’s institutional erosion.

2. It legitimizes Russia’s own territorial logic

If the US asserts:

• “Strategic necessity”

• “Security interests”

• “Historical claims”

• “Local consent narratives”

…to justify taking Greenland, Russia can immediately mirror this logic for:

• Crimea

• Eastern Ukraine

• Arctic continental shelf claims

• Influence over Belarus

• Pressure on the Baltics

This collapses the moral distinction the West relies on when condemning Russian expansionism.

Russia doesn’t need recognition—only normative ambiguity.

3. It destabilizes Arctic governance (where Russia is strongest)

The Arctic is governed by:

• Fragile treaties

• Customary cooperation

• Environmental & scientific coordination

• De-escalatory norms

A US land grab would:

• Militarize Arctic politics

• Undercut cooperative governance

• Push states toward unilateralism

Russia already:

• Has the largest Arctic military footprint

• Controls the Northern Sea Route

• Treats the Arctic as a security theater, not a commons

Chaos favors the incumbent power.

4. It accelerates European strategic autonomy (away from the US)

If the US behaves like a territorial power rather than a security guarantor, Europe will:

• Hedge against US unpredictability

• Reduce intelligence sharing

• Slow military integration with US command structures

• Explore alternative security arrangements

That weakens:

• NATO interoperability

• US leadership legitimacy

• Transatlantic coordination on sanctions and export controls

Russia benefits from any decoupling of US–EU trust.

5. It creates internal US distraction and legal chaos

Annexing Greenland would trigger:

• Massive constitutional litigation

• Congressional resistance

• Indigenous rights battles

• International court cases

• Sanctions retaliation risks

This absorbs:

• Political bandwidth

• Diplomatic capital

• Military focus

Russia historically benefits when the US is inward-facing.

6. It reframes the US as an imperial actor (globally)

For countries in:

• Africa

• Latin America

• Southeast Asia

• The Middle East

A US attempt to take Greenland reinforces the narrative:

Russia thrives in that rhetorical environment, especially in:

• UN forums

• Non-aligned states

• Anti-colonial discourse

• Global South diplomacy

7. Why this fits Trump’s pattern (even if unintentionally)

Donald Trump consistently:

• Treats alliances as transactional

• Undervalues institutional legitimacy

• Prioritizes symbolic dominance over system stability

• Frames geopolitics as real estate

That worldview accidentally aligns with Russian objectives—even when rhetoric is hostile.

Russia doesn’t need Trump to be “pro-Russia.”
It only needs him to be anti-system.

Bottom line

Trump making Greenland part of the US would benefit Russia because it:

1. Fractures NATO

2. Erodes international norms

3. Militarizes the Arctic

4. Weakens US moral authority

5. Distracts Washington

6. Validates Russian narratives globally

In short:

By aligning with Russia and adopting its grievances against the Western liberal order, the administration validates its own domestic war against the “globalists” who built that order.

PASCAL HETZSCHOLDT

·

20 DEC

The Convergence of Retribution and Realignment: An Exhaustive Strategic Analysis of the Trump-Russia-China Triad (2025)

Read full story

Grok: If Trump and Musk governed the U.S. like Russia and China, Americans would face a stark trade-off: efficiency and "strength" for freedom and equity.

PASCAL HETZSCHOLDT

·

4 APR

Question for Grok: Look at all the posts on X when answering the following question: "If Trump and Musk would treat their own citizens in the same way as the countries they look up to - Russia and China respectively - what would that mean for the population of the US?" Compare Russian and Chinese policies and the consequences for their populations and e…

Read full story