Afrasianet - Dr. Sabri Saidam - Greenland is now a scandalous mirror of a colonial approach that has been hidden from view for centuries, and US President Donald Trump is reviving it these days with the hustle and bustle of the post-apocalyptic world, as the promising island is no longer a snow-capped island, nor a geographical area far from the calamities of politics, but a platform that has reformulated colonial concepts this time with the new logic of shopping.
Either you sell your land to the White House broker, or you hand over its keys to the fire and muscles! Greenland is now at the forefront of the scene, and with it the greed and thirst of some for the abundant natural resources, and the strategic military position that is capable of warding off the ambitions of the Russian bear and the ambitions of the Chinese dragon, so that its people will lose their right to self-determination, and perhaps become a refugee with "food grains", displacement tents, the backlog of the displaced, the key to return, the canon blanket, the pictures of loved ones, and the title deeds.
All this because Uncle Sam, or rather Trump, decided to turn Greenland into an "investment opportunity", in the face of the possibility that he would say that Greenland, which is sparsely populated, has become "a land without a people." For a people without a land!" All this in the face of a political discourse that knows no shame, hesitation, or trembling.
The world does not need new councils, as much as it needs a new conscience that ensures the redefinition of sovereignty in front of peoples who are neither bought nor sold, and countries that do not limit themselves to a gas or uranium deal.
Denmark, the sovereign of Greenland, is being asked by Trump today: How can someone who arrived on a ship hundreds of years ago claim ownership of a land? Without asking himself: How did his grandparents go to the America that he now heads?
On a rocket? Or a nuclear bomb? How can they declare their ownership of the land to which they have taken refuge, and eat of its goodness, and achieve the riches of the land afterwards?
Trump's grandparents, like many around the world, were nothing but immigrants, some fleeing poverty, some refugees from persecution, and others survivors of adventure.
They established their countries on the lands of stricken peoples, whose historical narratives have been distorted. How can this legacy, with its violence and contradiction, be forgotten and turned into a moral reference for talking about "buying" land or taking it by force?
Trump frankly says: "To those who stand against me in war and hell with weapons, or with tax knees! While those who stand with me are victorious and victorious!"
As for the painful surreal scene, and even the most shameful, was embodied in the presence of the Danish delegates at the negotiating table on the future of Greenland, with Trump's associates, which suggested Denmark's readiness to discuss the principle and not adhere to the categorical rejection, so that there would be no firm adherence to the position, and the acceptance of the principle of bargaining would be present, and the search for a "suitable graduation."
It is as if the problem is not in the idea itself, but in the way it is produced, as if the media are saying: the danger lies in how the principle is tacitly blessed, despite the declared positions of rejection.
This scene brings us back to a deeper question: Where is international law, and the right of peoples to self-determination? Are we facing a clear embodiment of the moral bankruptcy of the world order following its bankruptcy in Gaza, or a clear shift that returns us to a colonial approach that recognizes only power and money?
Hence, the talk about the "Peace Council" that Trump established for Gaza and called for by most world leaders. Is it an alternative to the "wounded" NATO, which is no longer seen only through the prism of military interests?
Or about the United Nations, which is exhausted by vetoes and duplicity? Or about the BRICS, which is looking for an economic balance in the face of Trump's brutality?
Frankly, the world does not need new councils, as much as it needs a new conscience that guarantees the redefinition of sovereignty in front of peoples who do not buy or sell, and countries and those in them, that are not reduced to a deal of gas, lithium or uranium.
Greenland and Gaza are not a geographical test, but a difficult moral test and a real question, which does not focus on who has the right to negotiate them, but rather: How can this world witness the birth of those who have the audacity to impose the concept of a "state for sale"? A question with an answer drawn! Wait and see!
Palestinian writer
