Estonian Experts: New US-Denmark Deal on Greenland Just Reaffirms 2004 Agreement
The US, Denmark and Greenland are preparing to sign a new agreement on the island's future, but Estonian experts say similar US rights were already secured in a 2004 deal. They say the main purpose now is to let both sides exit the dispute without losing face.
US President Donald Trump and Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen have announced they are preparing a new agreement aimed at easing tensions over the future of Greenland, the world's largest island. The deal is expected to be signed next week during the UN General Assembly.
According to statements from both sides, Washington will gain broad security-related powers — the US will be able to expand existing bases in Greenland and build new ones. It is also expected that no military bases belonging to non-NATO countries will be allowed on the island.
Similar terms have existed since 2004
Estonian experts, cited by the news program "Aktuaalne Kaamera," point out that a fairly broad agreement between the parties has existed since 2004 and already confirms the United States' right to act in Greenland at its own discretion under certain conditions. According to the experts, the new agreement is mainly needed to let both sides step back from the conflict without damaging their reputations.
Political commentator Kaarel Kaas noted that Trump's statement on the matter was entirely in his characteristic style — presenting it as one of the greatest achievements in American history, credited above all to his own efforts, which he said clearly reflects a desire to appear as the winner.
Tensions had been serious
Just a few months ago the situation looked far more dangerous, as Trump's statements about the need to establish American control over Greenland raised doubts about relations among NATO allies. Denmark took the risk of a large-scale conflict seriously enough that its military prepared contingency plans in case of a possible US operation on the island.
US affairs expert and Meta Advisory Group managing partner Andreas Kaju said that sometimes achieving nothing new is itself a positive outcome, since it allows the parties to close the topic. He noted the new agreement largely just reaffirms arrangements that were already in force.
Final conclusions can only be drawn once the text of the agreement is published, as for now the parties are mainly discussing its political principles. Kaas added that international agreements typically benefit all parties to some degree, and that the deal currently appears to allow everyone involved to move forward without looking like losers.
