RSS
Greenland: The Strategic Center of the High North
Icebergs float in a fjord near the south Greenland town of Narsaq July 28, 2009. REUTERS/Bob Strong
President Donald Trump has reignited interest in the strategic status of the island of Greenland following his proposal to purchase it from Denmark, which controls it. The previous Trump administration had already proposed to purchase the island.
Greenland is a central part of the Arctic region, an area that is of substantial geopolitical significance. The increased focus on the island’s strategic value has been accompanied by calls from its Inuit residents to make the local government in Nuuk (Greenland’s capital) fully independent of Denmark. While recent statements by Trump about his intentions have stoked tensions, Denmark is conducting secret talks with the US to expand American military bases.
The region is important because the melting of the glaciers is creating potential economic and strategic opportunities. The US, Russia, and China are all taking steps to strengthen their military presence in the area. In 2014, Denmark and Greenland claimed an area of 895,000 square kilometers beyond the Arctic Circle and up to the border of the Russian exclusive economic zone. Denmark also has claims to the Lomonosov Ridge, which it sees as a geological extension of Greenland. For its part, Russia has territorial claims against Norway, which has expanded its continental shelf to include the Barents Sea, the Arctic Ocean and the Norwegian Sea.
Denmark, which officially maintains its sovereignty in the region, has struggled to preserve the Arctic island’s Danish identity and set its agenda. The two share a long history of power struggles. In late 1826, a trade treaty was signed between Denmark, Sweden, and Norway that included recognition of Danish sovereignty over Greenland, Iceland, and the Faroe Islands. William H. Seward, the US Secretary of State from 1861 to 1869 who spearheaded the purchase of Alaska from Russia, also proposed — without success — that the US purchase Greenland and Iceland from Denmark.
During World War I, Denmark sold the West Indies to the US in return for American recognition of its claim to extend its sovereignty to all of Greenland. In 1919, the Norwegian Foreign Minister expressed his government’s explicit recognition of Denmark’s ownership of Greenland, following negotiations that resulted in the transfer of the Arctic island of Spitsbergen to Norway. In 1933, a decisive judgment was issued recognizing Danish sovereignty over all of Greenland as part of a legal battle between Denmark and Norway. A tribunal of judges rejected the Norwegian argument that parts of Greenland were no-man’s land. Following the judgment, the Norwegian government declared that it was rescinding its ownership of East Greenland. In return, Denmark announced that it would not harm Norway’s economic interests in the island.
Fast forward to today. In recent years, Denmark has adopted a renewed defense strategy in the Arctic region, which includes Greenland and the Faroe Islands. As a result, it has accelerated its armament while striving for close security cooperation with the Nordic countries in the protection of critical infrastructure especially in the Arctic region and the Baltic Sea. The Norwegian General Staff increased Nordic cooperation by establishing a Nordic Air Force Command as part of the NATO command structure. Norway notes that it is necessary to recognize the military challenges along the Finnish-Russian border, the strategic location of the Swedish island of Gotland in the Baltic Sea, and the importance of the Danish Straits that connect the Baltic and North Seas.
At the same time, Denmark has pledged to be a significant player in the Arctic. In December 2019, at the NATO summit in London, Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen revealed plans to spend two hundred million euros on promoting a renewed strategy for the Arctic region, and in June 2022, Denmark and the Faroe Islands agreed to install an early warning radar system around the islands. In view of the war in Ukraine, the Faroe Islands extended the ban on Russian vessels entering their ports, a move that aligns with the Danish government’s commitment to expand its defense infrastructure investment to an average of 143 billion Danish kroner over the coming decade.
The latest moves were also made under pressure from the Pentagon, which called for increased Danish involvement amid concerns that the government in Greenland’s capital, Nuuk, would find it difficult to refuse generous offers from China to increase its exposure and economic activity on the island. These actions correspond with Denmark’s policy on Greenland, which prohibits Chinese companies from building an airport on the island. The Americans are also conducting broader exercises in the region, and airborne divisions are training to increase their mobility to be more effective on a future battlefield. When these units operate in Greenland, they operate on missions on behalf of the Joint Arctic Command.
While Trump’s belligerent rhetoric is not conducive to negotiation, the Danes are nevertheless trying to form direct secret understandings with Trump’s people in order to increase the American presence in the region. The Danish public may be taken aback by Trump’s style of speech, but the government in Copenhagen gained experience dealing with a Trump administration during his previous term in office. It can be assumed that the government in Copenhagen is formulating a plan of action. It will allow Trump’s public statements to gain political capital, but will at the same time build discreet confidential or unofficial understandings with him to expand American activities.
Furthermore, NATO sees the Nordic countries as a vital factor in strengthening regional security and is developing an Arctic military strategy that involves large-scale exercises throughout the Nordic region. In 2018, a NATO exercise held in Norway showcased a significant demonstration of military strength. This large-scale maneuver involved NATO forces practicing a comprehensive offensive, including an assault on the Arctic coastline. NATO has also begun a renewed series of exercises and operations designed to respond to the Russian submarine threat in the region. These exercises, called Dynamic Mongoose, took place in the Norwegian Sea and adjacent areas and included most of the fleets of NATO’s northern flank.
The US has also been refining its Arctic policy through strategic military deployments. These include stationing a B1-Lancer squadron in Norway, establishing a naval operations center in Iceland, and conducting submarine-based exercises to ensure high operational readiness in the high north. Notably, in 2022, the US conducted the largest military exercise within the Arctic Circle in Norway since the 1980s, further underscoring the growing strategic importance of the region.
These developments reflect a concerted effort by NATO and its allies to enhance their preparedness and maintain stability in the evolving Arctic security landscape. The accession of Sweden and Finland to NATO slightly alters the military balance in the Arctic region while also supporting non-military initiatives that both countries have actively promoted in recent years.
Therefore, one should avoid drawing conclusions about a political clash between the Americans and the Danes. The latest challenges point to cooperation in the Arctic region. The government in Copenhagen has approved the resumption of Cold War-era radar activity on the Faroe Islands. In 2023 and 2024, two pairs of satellites were launched to monitor more than two million square kilometers of the Arctic Circle. This is to improve the intelligence capabilities of the US, and there is a high probability that this agreement also applies to Greenland.
Alongside these moves, there is the Arctic Security Forces Roundtable (ASFR), which serves as a platform for military leaders from Arctic and observer states to strengthen multilateral security cooperation. Denmark also encourages cooperation with the European Commission and Naalakkersuisut (the government of Greenland), which have initiated the EU Arctic Forum on Inuit Dialogue. In this context, Denmark acts as a liaison between the interests of the EU and the people of Greenland, with the participation of the current Danish Minister of Foreign Affairs and former Prime Minister Lars Løkke Rasmussen.
Nordic leaders have consistently demonstrated their ability to settle regional disputes without compromising broader Arctic cooperation. For instance, ecological concerns arising from a decade-long dispute among Iceland, the European Union, the Faroe Islands, and Norway were successfully addressed, leading to collaborative efforts to preserve the region. Similarly, disputes around Svalbard—related to the application of the Svalbard Treaty to the continental shelf surrounding the archipelago—were resolved. These disagreements, sparked by developments in the Norwegian Arctic as a potential resource hub, were effectively compartmentalized, ensuring they did not negatively impact overall Arctic cooperation.
The resolution of such disputes has maintained stability in the region, reinforcing the preference of Nordic states for peaceful and collaborative Arctic relations. However, recent suspicions and events highlight the need for strengthened security arrangements, including military exercises and enhanced surveillance capabilities by Nordic air forces to deter unexpected actions in the Arctic.
Meanwhile, Nuuk’s push for greater autonomy has raised concerns in the US, prompting warnings about potentially taking control of Greenland to prevent foreign interference. These developments are likely to foster dialogue between the US and Denmark on Greenland’s future, with the aim of avoiding political escalation and preserving regional stability.
Dr. Nir Levitan is a researcher at the BESA Center at Bar-Ilan University and at the Center for Cold War Studies at the University of Southern Denmark. A version of this article was originally published by The BESA Center.
The post Greenland: The Strategic Center of the High North first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Syria’s Sharaa Says Talks With Israel Could Yield Results ‘In Coming Days’
Syrian President Ahmed al-Sharaa speaks at the opening ceremony of the 62nd Damascus International Fair, the first edition held since the fall of Bashar al-Assad’s regime, in Damascus, Syria, Aug. 27, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Khalil Ashawi
Syria’s President Ahmed al-Sharaa said on Wednesday that ongoing negotiations with Israel to reach a security pact could lead to results “in the coming days.”
He told reporters in Damascus the security pact was a “necessity” and that it would need to respect Syria’s airspace and territorial unity and be monitored by the United Nations.
Syria and Israel are in talks to reach an agreement that Damascus hopes will secure a halt to Israeli airstrikes and the withdrawal of Israeli troops who have pushed into southern Syria.
Reuters reported this week that Washington was pressuring Syria to reach a deal before world leaders gather next week for the UN General Assembly in New York.
But Sharaa, in a briefing with journalists including Reuters ahead of his expected trip to New York to attend the meeting, denied the US was putting any pressure on Syria and said instead that it was playing a mediating role.
He said Israel had carried out more than 1,000 strikes on Syria and conducted more than 400 ground incursions since Dec. 8, when the rebel offensive he led toppled former Syrian leader Bashar al-Assad.
Sharaa said Israel’s actions were contradicting the stated American policy of a stable and unified Syria, which he said was “very dangerous.”
He said Damascus was seeking a deal similar to a 1974 disengagement agreement between Israel and Syria that created a demilitarized zone between the two countries.
He said Syria sought the withdrawal of Israeli troops but that Israel wanted to remain at strategic locations it seized after Dec. 8, including Mount Hermon. Israeli ministers have publicly said Israel intends to keep control of the sites.
He said if the security pact succeeds, other agreements could be reached. He did not provide details, but said a peace agreement or normalization deal like the US-mediated Abraham Accords, under which several Muslim-majority countries agreed to normalize diplomatic ties with Israel, was not currently on the table.
He also said it was too early to discuss the fate of the Golan Heights because it was “a big deal.”
Reuters reported this week that Israel had ruled out handing back the zone, which Donald Trump unilaterally recognized as Israeli during his first term as US president.
“It’s a difficult case – you have negotiations between a Damascene and a Jew,” Sharaa told reporters, smiling.
SECURITY PACT DERAILED IN JULY
Sharaa also said Syria and Israel had been just “four to five days” away from reaching the basis of a security pact in July, but that developments in the southern province of Sweida had derailed those discussions.
Syrian troops were deployed to Sweida in July to quell fighting between Druze armed factions and Bedouin fighters. But the violence worsened, with Syrian forces accused of execution-style killings and Israel striking southern Syria, the defense ministry in Damascus and near the presidential palace.
Sharaa on Wednesday described the strikes near the presidential palace as “not a message, but a declaration of war,” and said Syria had still refrained from responding militarily to preserve the negotiations.
RSS
Anti-Israel Activists Gear Up to ‘Flood’ UN General Assembly
US Capitol Police and NYPD officers clash with anti-Israel demonstrators, on the day Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu addresses a joint meeting of Congress, on Capitol Hill, in Washington, DC, July 24, 2024. Photo: REUTERS/Umit Bektas
Anti-Israel groups are planning a wave of raucous protests in New York City during the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) over the next several days, prompting concerns that the demonstrations could descend into antisemitic rhetoric and intimidation.
A coalition of anti-Israel activists is organizing the protests in and around UN headquarters to coincide with speeches from Middle Eastern leaders and appearances by US President Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. The demonstrations are expected to draw large crowds and feature prominent pro-Palestinian voices, some of whom have been criticized for trafficking in antisemitic tropes, in addition to calling for the destruction of Israe.
Organizers of the demonstrations have promoted the coordinated events on social media as an opportunity to pressure world leaders to hold Israel accountable for its military campaign against Hamas in Gaza, with some messaging framed in sharply hostile terms.
On Sunday, for example, activists shouted at Israel’s Ambassador to the UN Danny Danon.
“Zionism is terrorism. All you guys are terrorists committing ethnic cleansing and genocide in Gaza and Palestine. Shame on you, Zionist animals,” they shouted.
BREAKING: PRO-PALESTINE PROTESTORS CONFRONT “ISRAELI” AMBASSADOR DANNY DANON AT THE UNITED NATIONS
1/5 pic.twitter.com/4G1VYEMGzV
— Within Our Lifetime (@WOLPalestine) September 14, 2025
The Combat Antisemitism Movement (CAM), warned on its website that the scale and tone of the planned demonstrations risk crossing the line from political protest into hate speech, arguing that anti-Israel activists are attempting to hijack the UN gathering to spread antisemitism and delegitimize the Jewish state’s right to exist.
Outside the UN last week, masked protesters belonging to the activist group INDECLINE kicked a realistic replica of Netanyahu’s decapitated head as though it were a soccer ball.
US activist group plays soccer with Bibi’s mock decapitated HEAD right outside NYC UN HQ
Peep shot at 00:40
Footage posted by INDECLINE collective just as UN General Assembly about to kick off
‘Following the game, ball was donated to Palestinian Genocide Museum’ pic.twitter.com/TQ84sgZhKr
— RT (@RT_com) September 9, 2025
Within Our Lifetime (WOL), a radical anti-Israel activist group, has vowed to “flood” the UNGA on behalf of the pro-Palestine movement.
WOL, one of the most prolific anti-Israel activist groups, came under immense fire after it organized a protest against an exhibition to honor the victims of the Oct. 7 massacre at the Nova Music Festival in southern Israel. During the event, the group chanted “resistance is justified when people are occupied!” and “Israel, go to hell!”
“We will be there to confront them with the truth: Their silence and inaction enable genocide. The world cannot continue as if Gaza does not exist,” WOL said of its planned demonstrations in New York. “This is the time to make our voices impossible to ignore. Come to New York by any means necessary, to stand, to march, to demand the UN act and end the siege.”
Jewish Voice for Peace (JVP) and Palestinian Youth Movement (PYM), two other anti-Israel organizations that have helped organize widespread demonstrations against the Jewish state during the war in Gaza, also announced they are planning a march from Times Square to the UN headquarters on Friday.
“The time is now for each and every UN member state to uphold their duty under international law: sanction Israel and end the genocide,” the groups said in a statement.
JVP, an organization that purports to fight for “Palestinian liberation,” has positioned itself as a staunch adversary of the Jewish state. The group argued in a 2021 booklet that Jews should not write Hebrew liturgy because hearing the language would be “deeply traumatizing” to Palestinians. JVP has repeatedly defended the Oct. 7 massacre of roughly 1,200 people in southern Israel by Hamas as a justified “resistance.” Chapters of the organization have urged other self-described “progressives” to throw their support behind Hamas and other terrorist groups against Israel
Similarly, PYM, another radical anti-Israel group, has repeatedly defended terrorism and violence against the Jewish state. PYM has organized many anti-Israel protests in the two years following the Oct. 7 attacks in the Jewish state. Recently, Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AK) called for a federal investigation into the organization after Aisha Nizar, one of the group’s leaders, urged supporters to sabotage the US supply chain for the F-35 fighter jet, one of the most advanced US military assets and a critical component of Israel’s defense.
The UN General Assembly has historically been a flashpoint for heated debate over the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Previous gatherings have seen dueling demonstrations outside the Manhattan venue, with pro-Israel and pro-Palestinian groups both seeking to influence the international spotlight.
While warning about the demonstrations, CAM noted it recently launched a new mobile app, Report It, that allows users worldwide to quickly and securely report antisemitic incidents in real time.
RSS
Nina Davidson Presses Universities to Back Words With Action as Jewish Students Return to Campus Amid Antisemitism Crisis
Nina Davidson on The Algemeiner’s ‘J100’ podcast. Photo: Screenshot
Philanthropist Nina Davidson, who served on the board of Barnard College, has called on universities to pair tough rhetoric on combatting antisemitism with enforcement as Jewish students returned to campuses for the new academic year.
“Years ago, The Algemeiner had published a list ranking the most antisemitic colleges in the country. And number one was Columbia,” Davidson recalled on a recent episode of The Algemeiner‘s “J100” podcast. “As a board member and as someone who was representing the institution, it really upset me … At the board meeting, I brought it up and I said, ‘What are we going to do about this?’”
Host David Cohen, chief executive officer of The Algemeiner, explained he had revisited Davidson’s remarks while she was being honored for her work at The Algemeiner‘s 8th annual J100 gala, held in October 2021, noting their continued relevance.
“It could have been the same speech in 2025,” he said, underscoring how longstanding concerns about campus antisemitism, while having intensified in the aftermath of Hamas’s Oct. 7, 2023, massacre across southern Israel, are not new.
Davidson argued that universities already possess the tools to protect students – codes of conduct, time-place-manner rules, and consequences for threats or targeted harassment – but too often fail to apply them evenly. “Statements are not enough,” she said, arguing that institutions need to enforce their rules and set a precedent that there will be consequences for individuals who refuse to follow them.
She also said that stakeholders – alumni, parents, and donors – are reassessing their relationships with schools that, in their view, have not safeguarded Jewish students. While supportive of open debate, Davidson distinguished between protest and intimidation, calling for leadership that protects expression while ensuring campus safety.
The episode surveyed specific pressure points that administrators will face this fall: repeat anti-Israel encampments, disruptions of Jewish programming, and the challenge of distinguishing political speech from conduct that violates university rules. “Unless schools draw those lines now,” Davidson warned, “they’ll be scrambling once the next crisis hits.”
Cohen closed by framing the discussion as a test of institutional credibility, asking whether universities will “turn policy into protection” in real time. Davidson agreed, pointing to students who “need to know the rules aren’t just on paper.”
The full conversation is available on The Algemeiner’s “J100” podcast.