Secretary of State Marco Rubio made headlines this week when he spoke about President Donald Trump’s quest for the United States purchasing Greenland.
A reporter asked Rubio: “How does Greenland fit into all of this?”
“Well, the Arctic, which has gotten very little attention, but the Arctic circle and the Arctic region is going to become critical for shipping lanes. For how do you get some of this energy that’s going to be produced under President Trump? These energies rely on shipping lanes. The Arctic has some of the most valuable shipping lanes in the world. As some of the ice is melting, there’s become more and more navigable. We need to be able to defend that,” Rubio began.
“So if you project what the Chinese have done, it is just a matter of time before — because they are not an Arctic power. They do not have an Arctic presence. So they need to be able to have somewhere that they can stage from. And it is completely realistic to believe that the Chinese will eventually, maybe in the short-term, try to do in Greenland what they have done at the Panama Canal and in other places. And that is install facilities that give them access to the Arctic with the cover of a Chinese company, but that in reality serve a dual purpose,” he added.
Rubio continued, “That in a moment of conflict, they could send naval vessels to that facility and operate from there. And that is completely unacceptable to the national security of the world and to the security of the world and the national security of the United States. So the question becomes, if the Chinese begin to threaten Greenland, do we really trust that that is not a place where those deals are going to be made? Do we really trust that that is not a place where they would not intervene, maybe by force?”
“I think that’s been the president’s point. And that is that Denmark can’t stop them. They would rely on the United States to do so. And so his point is, if the United States is on the hook to provide — as we are now, we have a defense agreement with them — to protect Greenland if it comes under assault, if we’re already on the hook for having to do that, then we might as well have more control over what happens there. And so I know it’s a delicate topic for Denmark, but it’s, again, a national interest item for the United States,” Rubio said.
The reporter stepped in and asked: “So there was a con — a conference call between President Trump and the Danish prime minister. Apparently, it didn’t go very well. Reportedly involved some sort of a meltdown on the prime minister’s part. They don’t want to give it up. So what does that — what options does that leave us? Because President Trump did not rule out economic or potentially military use.”
“Well, I think President Trump’s, what he has said publicly is he wants to buy it. He wants to pay for it. And how we worked on something like that, how something like that is approached, obviously, is probably done better in the appropriate forms. A lot of this stuff is done publicly, and it’s not helpful because it puts the other side in a tough spot domestically. So those conversations are going to happen, but this is not a joke. Like, what he is saying is — is pretty accurate. I mean, people have been talking about it for years. We do have — this is not about acquiring land for the purpose of acquiring land, this is in our national interest, and it needs to be solved. President Trump’s put out there what he intends to do, which is to purchase it. I wasn’t privy to that phone call, but I imagine the phone call went the way a lot of these phone calls go, and that is he just speaks bluntly and frankly with people. And — and ultimately, I think diplomacy, in many cases, works better when you’re straightforward as opposed to using platitudes and — and language that translates to nothing,” Rubio said.
WATCH:
The reporter rounded out the interview with a light-hearted question: “So let’s look forward four years. Does the U.S. own Greenland?”
“We’ll see. I mean, obviously that’s the president’s priority, and he has made that point. I think that what I can tell you about four years without getting into specifics, because I don’t — you know, I’m not — we’re not in a position yet to discuss exactly how we’ll proceed tactically — what I think you can rest assured of is that four years from now, our interest in the Arctic will be more secure,” Rubio said.
“Our interest in the Panama Canal will be more secure. Our partnerships in the Western Hemisphere will be stronger, will be stronger. We need to understand a lot of these countries in Central America, they’re not destination sites, they are countries that migrants come through, and that — and that these human trafficking rings run people — run people through,” he added.
“It creates tremendous instability for these countries at a tremendous cost as well. They would welcome help in stopping that migration corridor from continuing because it’s destabilizing their countries. So I think we’re going to have a Western Hemisphere that’s more secure, and our national interest in all parts of the world, that’s the goal, are going to be more secure from the Arctic to Central America to even Africa, and certainly the Indo-Pacific,” Rubio continued.
