US vice-president JD Vance later says he will join unsolicited visit to Arctic island, which Mette Frederiksen says is ‘not what Greenland needs or wants’
Maintaining “decorum” is the entire reason we’re in this mess to begin with.
You give these asshats an inch, they run a mile with it and demand to know why you didn’t let them run 10 miles since you already let them run one mile.
I don’t care about “these asshats” but I really don’t want my governments to engage in a diplomatic race to the bottom or to start disregarding their own agreements willy nilly, it’s just not a good precedent. Also an eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind and all that. I understand that might be easy for me to say from a somewhat outside perspective but really, nothing good will come from doing this kind of stupid shit, we need to keep our heads high, respect the rules we agreed on and generally make sure we keep everything kosher, that’s the only long term play and the only way we can maintain trust from the rest of our allies. Otherwise we’re just like them.
Besides I’m not saying “roll over and take it”, rescinding the agreements is a much stronger move than an isolated (and illegal) refusal at the border.
Right, I think we agree on what needs to be done, I just want it to be done for real, at the diplomatic level, not an isolated move by a random border patrol agent.
What does “proper” to any country engaging with the US matter if the US ignores it and then fucks them over for doing it?
It was proper of Canada to uphold the trade agreement reached in Trumps first term, the US reneged on this and is dropping tariffs hand over fist regardless, and now no one is a winner.
Doing anything properly necessitates two parties can agree on something at a minimum and uphold that.
The US is an un-agreeable, improper, traitorous entity, therefore nothing can be done “properly”.
If Europe starts doing illegal shit like this, we will lose trust from the rest of our allies which aren’t going down the drain. I’ve written the US off already, but going all loose-cannon will set the precedent that we can’t be trusted and compromise the rest of our international relationships.
I don’t think the US needs to agree to anything in order to rescind whatever agreement is being discussed here.
I understand what you are saying, but context matters as well, and has superseded bureaucracy depending on the situation historically.
Poland never formally declared war on Germany in response to the invasion on September 1, 1939. Do you think badly of Poland for this because they didn’t “properly” declare war before trying to fight back?
I am doubtful, because the context matters to you in understanding what they were doing, and why they were doing it.
That’s fair, and I do agree in extreme circumstances decisions might need to be taken without having the time or resources to follow process, but we better choose those moments very fucking carefully. An invasion would qualify, this “visit” would not, imo.
This is not an option, based on the agreement made between Denmark and USA in 1951.
Yes it is. In reading the 1951 agreement it is specifically aimed at the following …
armed forces of the parties to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization may make use of facilities in Greenland in defense of Greenland and the rest of the North Atlantic Treaty area Source
DJ Vance, Usha Vance, the vice president’s wife, White House National Security Adviser Mike Waltz and Energy Secretary Chris Wright will visit, but none of them are current military members.
It would seem they can be refused according to your reference point.
In keeping with the provisions of Article VI of this Agreement, and in accordance with general rules mutually agreed upon and issued by the appropriate Danish authority in Greenland, the Government of the United States of America may enjoy, for its public vessels and aircraft and its armed forces and vehicles, the right of free access to and movement between the defense areas through Greenland, including territorial waters, by land, air and sea. This right shall include freedom from compulsory pilotage and from light or harbor dues. United States aircraft may fly over and land in any territory in Greenland, including the territorial waters thereof, without restriction except as mutually agreed upon.
This is not an option, based on the agreement made between Denmark and USA in 1951.
I agree that they should stay away, especially when asked to stay away by the government, but its not so straight forward
The US is breaking a shitload of their agreements globally with everyone and their dog at the minute, they can get fucked.
Sure, but they should do it properly e.g. officially rescind these agreements (I’m sure there’s a process for that).
Why?
Maintaining “decorum” is the entire reason we’re in this mess to begin with.
You give these asshats an inch, they run a mile with it and demand to know why you didn’t let them run 10 miles since you already let them run one mile.
I don’t care about “these asshats” but I really don’t want my governments to engage in a diplomatic race to the bottom or to start disregarding their own agreements willy nilly, it’s just not a good precedent. Also an eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind and all that. I understand that might be easy for me to say from a somewhat outside perspective but really, nothing good will come from doing this kind of stupid shit, we need to keep our heads high, respect the rules we agreed on and generally make sure we keep everything kosher, that’s the only long term play and the only way we can maintain trust from the rest of our allies. Otherwise we’re just like them.
Besides I’m not saying “roll over and take it”, rescinding the agreements is a much stronger move than an isolated (and illegal) refusal at the border.
That was President Biden’s choice of path to take. Look where it got us.
Denmark needs to tear up those agreements, because they will be trampled on.
Right, I think we agree on what needs to be done, I just want it to be done for real, at the diplomatic level, not an isolated move by a random border patrol agent.
What does “proper” to any country engaging with the US matter if the US ignores it and then fucks them over for doing it?
It was proper of Canada to uphold the trade agreement reached in Trumps first term, the US reneged on this and is dropping tariffs hand over fist regardless, and now no one is a winner.
Doing anything properly necessitates two parties can agree on something at a minimum and uphold that.
The US is an un-agreeable, improper, traitorous entity, therefore nothing can be done “properly”.
If Europe starts doing illegal shit like this, we will lose trust from the rest of our allies which aren’t going down the drain. I’ve written the US off already, but going all loose-cannon will set the precedent that we can’t be trusted and compromise the rest of our international relationships.
I don’t think the US needs to agree to anything in order to rescind whatever agreement is being discussed here.
I understand what you are saying, but context matters as well, and has superseded bureaucracy depending on the situation historically.
Poland never formally declared war on Germany in response to the invasion on September 1, 1939. Do you think badly of Poland for this because they didn’t “properly” declare war before trying to fight back?
I am doubtful, because the context matters to you in understanding what they were doing, and why they were doing it.
That’s fair, and I do agree in extreme circumstances decisions might need to be taken without having the time or resources to follow process, but we better choose those moments very fucking carefully. An invasion would qualify, this “visit” would not, imo.
Yes, what you said is fair as well. I think we have reached a mutually positive conclusion then. Have a good day.
Love it when that happens :)
Yes it is. In reading the 1951 agreement it is specifically aimed at the following …
DJ Vance, Usha Vance, the vice president’s wife, White House National Security Adviser Mike Waltz and Energy Secretary Chris Wright will visit, but none of them are current military members.
It would seem they can be refused according to your reference point.
They can refuse any meetings in Greenland they try to hold though.
Yes definitely. There will be no official contact between them. Also a lot of police has been brought in from Denmark for this
Silent protests are planned. They will be turning their backs to the convoys when they drive past them
deleted by creator
deleted by creator