Trump's Greenland threats spark Iceland jitters
REYKJAVIK: US President Donald Trump's threats to take over Greenland have neighbouring Iceland rethinking its long-term defence, currently provided by the United States and NATO as the volcanic island has no military of its own.
Around 74 percent of Icelanders think Trump's interest in Greenland, and in the Arctic in general, pose a threat to their country, according to a recent poll by public broadcaster RUV.
'We can easily put ourselves in Greenlanders' shoes,' an Icelandic member of parliament for the governing Social Democrats, Dagur Eggertsson, told AFP.
The White House under Trump has not so far voiced any plans for Iceland, a subarctic island in the North Atlantic between the UK and Greenland and home to 390,000 people.
Trump 'is threatening Greenland every day but doesn't say a thing about Iceland', said Valur Ingimundarson, a professor of contemporary history at the University of Iceland.
He noted that while Iceland shares Greenland's geostrategic location, it does not possess the mineral riches believed to be hidden under Greenland's soil.
And like Greenland, Iceland has close military ties with the United States.
Washington has guaranteed Iceland's defence since 1951 following an agreement between the two NATO members.
During World War II, the Keflavik military base was a key US hub and it remained important to the alliance during the Cold War.
The 1951 agreement enables the United States to maintain troops on the island but allows Iceland to set limits on the number of soldiers and to unilaterally cancel the agreement with 18 months' notice.
Subsea infrastructure
Although the United States officially closed the Keflavik base in 2006, it returned following Russia's 2014 invasion of Crimea.
'The US military base has not formally been reopened in Iceland, but American troops are here the whole year round, if on a rotational basis,' Ingimundarson said.
At stake are underwater telecoms and energy infrastructure, at risk of potential Chinese or Russian sabotage.
Beijing and Moscow have been increasingly active in the Arctic as climate change opens up sea routes.
As a result, no one in Iceland has officially questioned the US presence or Reykjavik's military dependence on Washington.
'Iceland and the US have a longstanding and close relationship on security and defence matters, based on shared interest in the North Atlantic and the Arctic,' the foreign ministry told AFP.
'There is no reason to assume that this will change.'
Establishing an Icelandic army has always been a taboo subject.
'If the government would put it on the agenda, it would result in a divisive public debate, with those opposing the idea most likely having the upper hand,' Ingimundarson said.
Yet the tide appears to be gradually turning, said Eggertsson, the MP.
'We are in a time of transformation, where the clear vision from the post-World War years that Europe should not re-arm, but be provided defence under the NATO-US umbrella, is giving way,' he said.
Plan B
Advocating a multilateral approach to security, Iceland is now shifting its gaze toward Europe as Trump casts US defence ties with NATO allies into doubt.
Given the unpredictability of the Trump administration, 'we should have as a plan B (to) try to establish a close relationship with the EU,' Ingimundarson said.
The foreign ministry has already made it clear that partnerships with the EU 'are expected to deepen further in the coming years'.
'Iceland would definitely support a European NATO if the United States would withdraw from the alliance,' Ingimundarson said.
That would be an 'easier option' than transferring European defence to the EU -- of which Iceland is not a member.
'It wouldn't necessitate Iceland becoming an EU member, if it would seek to disentangle itself from the US,' he said.
Iceland launched EU membership negotiations in 2009 following its 2008 economic collapse. The talks were suspended in 2013, but a referendum on their resumption is due in 2027.
EU membership would not just be about safeguarding the island's security.
'It is also about economic prosperity, low tariffs with our biggest trading partners, fisheries and more,' Eggertsson said.
Fisheries policy would be the biggest stumbling block, with Iceland keen to retain total control over its lucrative fishing zones, a crucial pillar of its economy.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Malaysian Reserve
8 minutes ago
- Malaysian Reserve
US falls into Israel's trap
Israel presses forward with what many observers describe as a campaign of ethnic cleansing WHAT happened to President Donald Trump's promise of 'no war'? As this piece goes to print, the US stands perilously close to being dragged into a potentially catastrophic conflict with Iran — prodded by none other than the increasingly belligerent Israeli government. This looming confrontation threatens to send shockwaves through the global economy. Disruption to oil flows would only be the beginning. For a global economy already reeling from inflation and economic uncertainty — amplified by Trump's earlier tariff battles — this new crisis could deepen the struggles faced by Americans and others round the world. It is deeply ironic that such a potential war looms under a president who campaigned as an anti-war figure. During his 721-day run-up to the 2024 election, Trump repeatedly vowed to put 'America First' and steer clear of costly foreign entanglements. That message resonated strongly with a public exhausted by decades of endless wars and rising living costs. Many Americans saw no reason why the US should be involved in conflicts far away from their shores. Trump also promised swift solutions to some of the world's most intractable crises. At a March 2023 rally in Texas, he declared: 'Before I even arrive at the Oval Office, shortly after I win the presidency, I will have the disastrous war between Russia and Ukraine settled. I will have that settlement done within 24 hours.' Five months into his term, Ukraine remains a battlefield and Gaza continues to be a killing field. Israel — a small illegal nation with outsized influence — presses forward with what many observers describe as a campaign of ethnic cleansing. There is no peace in sight — only deepening tragedy. So, what does this say about Trump? About politicians in general? Well, that's politicians for us. They make promises to win elections, promises they cannot keep or never intended to keep in the first place. In the meantime, Israel's unrelenting bombardment of Gaza found a brief distraction when it launched missile strikes against Iran. But this temporary shift in focus could become a long-term quagmire — especially if the US becomes directly involved. To critics, this potential policy misstep over Iran appears to be yet another reckless idea from a leader who has shown little regard for nuance or diplomacy. Like his controversial tariffs, Trump's approach to international relations seems driven more by bravado than by strategy. In truth, Trump and his administration have demonstrated a troubling lack of understanding of global affairs. He spoke of ending the Russia-Ukraine war and resolving the Gaza crisis as if they were simple business deals. The reality, however, has proven far more complex. They don't happen at the snap of a fingers. The same can be said for his dangerous posturing toward Iran. The US has failed before — in Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan. Why should anyone believe that Iran — a country nearly five times the size of Malaysia, with a population of over 90 million — will be any easier to subdue? Iran has weathered decades of US sanctions and military threats. It is not a foe to be underestimated. Military experts have warned against such adventurism. Retired US Army Colonel Douglas Abbott Macgregor recently reminded listeners during a podcast discussion, of the 1983 Beirut bombing, in which a suicide truck attack killed 241 American servicemen. The explosion marked one of the deadliest single-day losses for the Marine Corps since World War II (WWII). Macgregor urged Trump to learn from history — to heed the that lesson former President Ronald Reagan learned too late. 'We fell into a trap, the usual Israel's trap,' Macgregor said. 'Drag us into the Middle East, make us targets.' This warning comes from a commander who led one of the early tank battles in the Gulf War. Trump's claim that the US won't put boots on the ground is naive. Relying solely on air and naval power does not eliminate risk — it merely changes the form it takes. History has shown that technological superiority alone cannot guarantee victory — or survival. After half a century of failed interventions, one might expect the US to have learned better. Some have. But not the military-industrial complex: The powerful alliance of government officials, military brass and defence contractors that profits handsomely from perpetual conflict. For them, war is not a tragedy; it's an opportunity. A new front means new weapons to test, new contracts to sign and a fresh narrative to justify ever-growing budgets. It's almost a jolly good business to wage wars as a profitable enterprise! As the retired colonel sums it up: 'Arrogance and self-delusion are trumping reason.' Habhajan Singh is the corporate editor of The Malaysian Reserve. This article first appeared in The Malaysian Reserve weekly print edition
New Straits Times
14 minutes ago
- New Straits Times
Putin: We're not mediators, just offering ideas on Israel-Iran crisis
SAINT PETERSBURG: Putin on Friday said he was not seeking to be a mediator between Iran and Israel, and was only suggesting ideas for how the countries could resolve the escalating crisis. The Kremlin has spent much of the week positioning Moscow as a potential peacemaker after Israel launched strikes on Iran, which retaliated with missiles and drones. But Western leaders have pushed back on a role for Putin and earlier this week Moscow said Israel had shown little interest in its overtures. "We are by no means seeking to act as a mediator, we are simply suggesting ideas," Putin said at an economic forum in Saint Petersburg. "If they turn out to be attractive to both sides, we will only be happy." While Moscow has condemned Israel's strikes, Russia has not offered military help to its ally Iran and has downplayed its obligations under a sweeping strategic partnership agreement signed just months ago. The foreign ministry on Thursday warned the United States against "military intervention" in the conflict, as it weighs joining Israel's strikes against Iran. And pressed multiple times to comment on Israel's apparent threats to kill Iran's supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Putin said Friday: "I really hope that the things you mention remain at the level of rhetoric." Putin spoke by phone with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian after Israel launched its strikes on Friday. But the Kremlin said earlier this week that it saw a "reluctance, at least on the part of Israel, to resort to any mediation services or to embark on a peaceful path towards a settlement." US President Donald Trump and French President Emmanuel Macron have publicly pushed back at the idea of a mediation role for Putin. "He actually offered to help mediate, I said: 'Do me a favour, mediate your own. Let's mediate Russia first, okay?'" Trump told reporters at the White House last week, referring to Russia's conflict with Ukraine. "I said 'Vladimir, let's mediate Russia first, you can worry about this later."- AFP
New Straits Times
14 minutes ago
- New Straits Times
Trump disputes own spy chief's take on Iran nuclear programme
WASHINGTON: US President Donald Trump said on Friday that his Director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, was wrong in suggesting there is no evidence Iran is building a nuclear weapon. Trump contested intelligence assessments relayed earlier this year by his spy chief that Tehran was not working on a nuclear weapon when he spoke with reporters at an airport in Morristown, New Jersey. "She's wrong," Trump said. Gabbard testified to Congress in March that the US intelligence community continued to judge that Tehran was not working on a nuclear warhead. Trump's comments came as the president has said he would weigh involvement in the Iran-Israel conflict over the next two weeks. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has justified a week of airstrikes on Iranian nuclear and military targets by saying Tehran was on the verge of having a warhead. Gabbard's office has previously pointed to quotes from the spy chief saying that she and Trump were "on the same page" regarding the status of Iran's nuclear programme. Iran denies developing nuclear weapons, saying its uranium enrichment programme was only for peaceful purposes. A source with access to US intelligence reports told Reuters that the assessment presented by Gabbard had not changed. They said US spy services also judged that it would take up to three years for Iran to build a warhead with which it could hit a target of its choice. Some experts, however, believe it could take Iran a much shorter time to build and deliver an untested crude nuclear device, although there would be no guarantee it would work. Trump has frequently disavowed the findings of US intelligence agencies, which he and his supporters have charged - without providing proof - are part of a "deep state" cabal of US officials opposed to his presidency. The Republican president repeatedly clashed with US spy agencies during his first term, including over an assessment that Moscow worked to sway the 2016 presidential vote in his favour and his acceptance of Russian President Vladimir Putin's denials.
