Greenland votes on March 11. Independence was the key issue, but Trump has changed the campaign
- Written by: Matt Qvortrup, Senior Research Fellow, Centre for European Studies, Australian National University
“We don’t want to be Danes or Americans”, Greenland Prime Minister Múte Egede told Fox News[1] recently. He wants his country to be independent and plans to hold a referendum.
But this is no longer the main issue for Greenlanders as the world’s largest island votes in a general election on March 11.
US President Donald Trump has declared it is absolutely necessary for America to take over Greenland – and he will not be deterred. He even refused to rule out[2] using military or economic force.
The Danish territory is now the subject of international controversy. And that has altered the trajectory of the election.
Greenland’s territory status
The name Greenland was invented by Viking Erik den Röde[3], who encountered the territory around 990 and wanted to lure his compatriots to the island.
Since the 1950s, America has operated an airbase in Thule in the north of the island.
However, at present, the territory – roughly the size of Mexico but with a population of just 56,000 people – is part of Denmark. The Vikings never left.
Greenland today
In the early 1950s, Greenland became a county of Denmark, and in 1979, it was given its own devolved parliament – with powers to make laws.
Its single-chamber parliament in Nuuk – the territory’s capital – is called the Inatsisartut[5] in Greenlandic, which means “those who make the laws”. Apart from defence and foreign affairs, all of these are made by the Greenlanders.
Independence from Denmark only became an issue in the early 2000s, but it was not seriously debated before 2008 when Denmark agreed to Greenland’s future status.
Part of the deal was that the money Denmark sends Greenland every year (known as a “block grant”) will be reduced as mineral mining starts paying for public services. The agreement was passed in a referendum in 2008, which also gives Greenland the right to secede at a time of its choosing.
The incumbent Egede is the leader of the left-wing Inuit Ataqatigiit party, which wants independence from Denmark. So does the centrist party Naleraq.
The two parties have have a combined 16 of the 31 seats in the parliament. However, some members of other parties – including the previously unionist Siumut (which is currently part of the government) – have signalled a gradual shift. So, the actual number of members that would vote for independence is likely to be slightly higher.
Independence is opposed by the conservative Demokraatit party, the centre-left Siumut party and the centre-right Atasut party. The Demokraatit party has become more popular than the Siumut and Atasut parties. The latter two used to dominate Greenlandic politics but have struggled in the past few years.
Will there be a referendum?
The current government is a centre-left coalition of Egede’s Inuit Ataqatigiit and Siumut. The two parties agreed to disagree on the issue of independence, but that could change after the election. And, even the Siumut parliamentary leader Doris J. Jensen has expressed guarded support for breaking free from Copenhagen.
Although Naleraq and Inuit Ataqatigiit are ideologically apart, it seems likely they will call for a referendum after the election (should they win a majority).
A territory unilaterally calling a referendum on independence would usually be unconstitutional in most countries. The Spanish government called a 2017 independence referendum[7] in Catalonia unconstitutional and responded with a police crackdown.
But Greenland is different. In 2009, the Danish parliament passed a law[8] allowing the Greenlanders to hold a vote on independence at the time of their choosing.
Greenland has an abundance of critical minerals[9], including copper, tungsten and even platinum – albeit mostly buried under the ice.
It is likely access to these minerals is what is driving Trump’s interest in Kalaallit Nunaat (“the land of the people”), as Greenland’s Inuit people call their country.
Until recently, this was not the main issue on most voters’ agendas. Many in Greenland are more concerned with bread and butter issues such as welfare and the cost of living than with underground resources. But Trump’s interest in the island has changed the debate.
The election as it stands
The current government parties have lost ground. Inuit Ataqatigiit’s projected vote share is down from 37% to 31%, and Siumut’s will – according to polls[10] – be reduced from 29% to 21%.
The main beneficiaries of the unpopularity of the present government are Demokraatit and Naleraq. The former stands to double its vote share to 18%, 2% ahead of the latter.
The overall percentage of parties that support independence has not changed.
Whatever the result of the election, neither side wants to become Americans.
The parties may not agree on whether they want to continue their 1,000-year union with Denmark, but they agree with Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen’s message[11] to Donald Trump: “Greenland is not for sale”.
Anders Vistisen, a Danish member of the European parliament for the Nationalist Dansk Folkeparti, put it even more succinctly. He told the assembly[12] recently:
Let me put it into words you might understand. Mr Trump, fuck off.
None of the parties have expressed sympathy for being part of the US, but all are happy to discuss future collaboration[13] on defence. All of them, in different ways, are open to exploring the possibility of minerals exploration but sympathy in Greenland for Trump’s position is non-existent.
References
- ^ told Fox News (www.foxnews.com)
- ^ rule out (www.bbc.com)
- ^ Erik den Röde (exploration.marinersmuseum.org)
- ^ AP Photo/Emilio Morenatt (photos.aap.com.au)
- ^ Inatsisartut (ina.gl)
- ^ EPA/MADS CLAUS RASMUSSEN DENMARK OUT (photos.aap.com.au)
- ^ 2017 independence referendum (www.abc.net.au)
- ^ passed a law (english.stm.dk)
- ^ critical minerals (data.geus.dk)
- ^ according to polls (knr.gl)
- ^ message (www.youtube.com)
- ^ told the assembly (edition.cnn.com)
- ^ collaboration (www.reuters.com)
Authors: Matt Qvortrup, Senior Research Fellow, Centre for European Studies, Australian National University
