Greenland Crisis : Story of the Last Week
The Greenland crisis has escalated over the past week. Greenlanders are protesting, Trump is threatening, NATO troops are on the scene… How did we get there? Donald Trump first came up with the idea of buying Greenland during his first presidency. At the time, everyone just waved it off as an absurd joke. It wasn’t until his second presidency – when he returned to power with much more radical rhetoric – that people realized he wasn’t joking. In the spring of 2025, Trump began to claim Greenland again – but this time more boldly. He even sent his son and JD Vance there to incite the locals against Denmark, which administers the island. Even though the topic faded from public attention amid other global crises, it never fully disappeared. Greenland resurfaced again when the US attacked Venezuela at the beginning of January. A few hours later, a disturbing status appeared on the Twitter account of Katie Miller. The wife of Trump advisor Stephen Miller shared a map of Greenland with the American flag and the caption “soon.” Stephen Miller later stated that “Greenland should be part of the US” and that “nobody’s gonna fight the US over the future of Greenland”. Soon, Donald Trump himself joined in. In addition to statements such as “The US would own Greenland one way or another,” he ordered special forces to draw up a plan for a possible invasion of Greenland. As a result, “Hands off Greenland” protests started in Denmark this weekend. Many European leaders also supported these protests. At the same time, Denmark, along with other NATO members like Germany, France, the United Kingdom, Norway, Sweden, Finland, and the Netherlands, sent its soldiers to Greenland for exercises. To demonstrate to Donald Trump that they are not afraid of him. Trump responded on his own social media platform. He threatened to impose tariffs on all states that participated in the exercise, which he would gradually increase. But how did Trump even come up with the claim to Greenland? Up until the 10th century, Greenland was inhabited by Indigenous Arctic people. In 985, Norse Viking Erik the Red arrived on the island, naming it “Greenland” to attract other Norsemen. Their settlements thrived for centuries but mysteriously declined by the 15th century (likely due to climate change or conflict with Inuit). In the 18th century, Denmark-Norway rediscovered Greenland during its colonial expansion. When the monarchy of Denmark and Norway broke apart in 1814, Denmark kept Greenland. And that’s when the US enters the game for Greenland for the first time In 1867, after buying Alaska from Russia, US Secretary of State William Seward tried to buy Greenland. He was not only motivated by Greenland’s vast fisheries and mineral wealth but also by its strategic location. By acquiring Greenland, he could force Canada (which lies between Alaska and Greenland) to become part of the US. But Denmark refused. US governement discussed this plan again in 1910 – but made no official offer to Denmark. However, in 1916, Denmark sold to the US another of its islands: the West Indies (now the Virgin Islands) – mainly because they were economically draining. Then came World War II. After Germany occupied Denmark in 1940, the United States signed a “Greenland Defense” agreement with the Danish ambassador, granting the US the right to build military bases on the island. After Germany surrendered in May 1945, the Danes expected the Americans to go home. But they refused. The Cold War with the Soviet Union was beginning, and the Americans were well aware of the strategic location of Greenland. In 1946, during the Truman presidency, the US proposed to pay Denmark $100 million for the island. However, the then Danish Foreign Minister Gustav Rasmussen rejected the proposal – he considered it absurd. According to him, Denmark owed America a lot for its help in the war, but not the whole island of Greenland. Ultimately, in 1951, a compromise was reached. The US and Denmark signed an agreement allowing a US military presence in Greenland in exchange for financial aid. This gave the US the control over Greenland’s defense, though Denmark retained sovereignty. Greenland’s path to independence In 1953, Greenland was integrated into Denmark, meaning that it was no longer a colony. During the 1970s, an independence movement emerged, culminating in 1979, when Greenland gained so-called “home rule” (= self-governance in certain domestic affairs). In 2008, a referendum on greater autonomy leading to eventual independence was held. The vast majority of people voted for loosening ties to Denmark. So, in 2009, Greenland upgraded to “self-government,” meaning total autonomy except for defense and foreign policy, which are still controlled by Denmark. And it also means that Greenlanders can organize a referendum on total independence from Denmark – if they want to. Do they want to? According to the Verian Group survey, 56% of Greenlanders would vote yes to Greenlandic independence if a referendum were held today. But at the same time, 45% of Greenlanders do not want independence if the standard of living is negatively affected. So, the reason the referendum hasn’t been held yet is probably due mainly to economic reasons… On the other hand, when it comes to the question of whether Greenlanders want to be part of the US, the polls show very clear no (by 85%). There have been no major US attempts to acquire Greenland since 1951 – not until Donald Trump raised the idea again in 2019. Why does Greenland matter for Trump? strategic positon Trump claims that Greenland is important to him because of its strategic position toward Russia and China, currently operating in the Arctic region and therefore posing a threat to the US. Although Russian and Chinese ships have appeared in the Arctic Ocean, their main “territory” remains the Pacific Ocean and the Bering Sea, near the US state of Alaska. So, strategically speaking, Trump should be much more worried about the Russian and Chinese threat to Alaska than to Greenland. Moreover, the US
Protests in Iran: Story of the Last Week
Over the past week, Iran has seen a new wave of protests. It all started economically on December 28, 2025, in Tehran, Iran’s capital, when local merchants protested after another sharp drop of the Iranian currency (the rial). This time, however, it reached its lowest value in history: inflation has risen to 40%. Iran’s worsening economic situation is due to both corruption and sanctions imposed on Iran over its nuclear program. Students soon joined, and the demonstrations turned political, with slogans targeting Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei. While Iran has a president, his role is purely ceremonial. The real power lies with the Supreme Leader – a position created after the 1979 revolution, when Iran became an Islamic state. Only two men have held this lifelong role: Ruhollah Khomeini and the current leader, Ali Khamenei, who has ruled for 36 years and is now facing protests The protests in Iran are the largest protests since 2022, with over 550 people killed and 20,000 detained after the death of Mahsa Amini. But let’s start from the beginning… How did Iran get here? Although Russia and Britain always tried to get Iran under their influence, Iran maintained its independence for a long time. Until World War II, when it sided with Germany. Fearing this alliance, Britain and the USSR invaded, removed the Shah, and installed his son, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi. Unlike his father, the new Shah was not afraid to open the country to foreign – mainly Western – influences. But the Iranian people were a bit more skeptical of his open foreign policy. In 1951, they democratically elected Mohammad Mossadegh as prime minister. Mossadegh nationalized Iran’s oil industry, controlled by the British at that time. This upset the British, so they convinced the US that Mossadegh’s rule would inevitably lead to a communist coup and that Iran would side with the Soviet Union in the Cold War. In 1953, the American and British secret services orchestrated a coup, overthrowing Mossadegh. Initially, Mohammad Reza was against it, but he quickly realized that with such an attitude, the British and Americans wouldn’t let him stay in power for long, so eventually, he joined the coup. Because of that, the Iranians started to consider him a coward. To prove to them (and to himself) that he was not, he began to implement various socio-economic reforms. His goal? To turn Iran into a modern, Western-style superpower. He redistributed land from large landowners to small farmers, built dams and power plants, fighted illiteracy, and gave women the right to vote… And, to REALLY show that he was no coward, he became more autocratic. He even established a secret police, SAVAK, that brutally suppressed any opposition to him. Mohammad Reza’s style of government inevitably led to increased US influence in Iran – at least economically. Concerning security, the Americans were not so eager to guarantee military help to Iran in case of an attack by the USSR. But if the mountain will not come to Muhammad, then Muhammad will go to the mountain. In this case, Mohammad Reza began negotiations with the Soviet Union about a non-aggression pact. Of course, the American president didn’t like that, so he convinced Mohammad to back down from these negotiations – which in turn angered the Soviet Union, who began supporting Mohammad Reza’s opponents. Iran Islamic revolution in 1979 And he had quite a few opponents: Ruhollah Khomeini, a Shia cleric, became the loudest critic of Mohammad Reza’s rule – not only in religious circles – he managed to appeal to a wide spectrum of dissatisfied people. What’s the difference between Shia and Sunni Islam? Simply put, the two groups differ over who they recognize as Muhammad’s rightful successor. Shia Muslims (the majority in Iran) believe leadership should be hereditary, passing to Muhammad’s descendants. Sunni Muslims (the majority globally) argue that the leader should be elected. The Revolution Anti-government protests began in October 1977 and gradually intensified, escalating in the spring of 1979, when Mohammad Reza fled into exile and Khomeini took over the government. Shortly after, he held a referendum on whether Iran “should become an Islamic Republic or not”. According to official results, 99% of people voted “yes,” and the turnout was 99%. Mohammad Reza was indeed unpopular, but the fact that the elections were held publicly and that the ballots were color-coded (green for yes, red for no) certainly played some role in this result. At the same time, the question “Islamic Republic: yes or no” is quite vague. Even today, in the age of the internet, it’s hard to understand what you’re signing up for – let alone in the 70s as someone living in extreme poverty… Many, focused on survival, didn’t grasp the implications until later – when it was too late. Life Under Sharia Law Since the revolution, Iran’s legal and political system has been strictly based on so-called Sharia law. Sharia law is not some uniformly codified law written in black and white somewhere. It’s more like different interpretations of how people should live according to the Quran (in the case of Iran, this interpretation is led by the Supreme Leader). This is a deeply problematic system because everyone can interpret the Quran basically however they want, since Islam does not have any central authority, like the Pope, to which they would be accountable. Iran is living proof of that. What exactly does living in accordance with the Quran mean according to its Supreme Leaders? For example: Sanctions on Iran Frankly, it’s primarily women who are negatively affected. But they are not the only ones with a reason to protest: Since the revolution, Iran has been regularly subject to sanctions – mainly from the United Nations, US, UK, and EU, primarily because of its nuclear program (on which Iran cooperates with China and Russia). Sanctions have led to an increasingly deteriorating economic situation, affecting everyone. There have been several big protests in Iran’s history: Unfortunately for Iranians, each wave of protest has been met
Story of the Last Week: Ceasefire in Gaza
On January 15, 2025, Qatar confirmed the successful negotiation of a ceasefire in Gaza, bringing hope to a region devastated by ongoing violence. This agreement promises a temporary halt to hostilities and humanitarian relief for millions of affected civilians. But can this fragile peace lead to lasting resolution? The Roots of the Conflict After WWI, the Ottoman Empire which contained nowadays Israel and Palestine, collapsed. The victorious Allies ( decided to divide it into so-called mandates and administer them until they were able to self-govern. The part with current Israel and Palestine was administered by Great Britain as Mandatory Palestine. In 1947 the United Nations decided to end the British administration and divide Mandatory Palestine into Israel and Palestine. At this time there were already tensions between Jews and Arabs, once the British withdrew, war broke out at the end of which Israel controlled 2/3 of the Palestinian territory. However, the conflict continued. Between 1947 and 2023, various conflicts took place between Israelis and Palestinians, some of which even escalating into wars. The Recent Developpement On October 7, 2023, Hamas attacked Israel, killing approximately 1200 people and taking 252 hostages. In response, Israel initiated a large-scale military operation in Gaza. Killing around 49,000 Palestinians, many of them being children, destroying local infrastructure, forcibly displacing 1,9 millions of people (so almost 90 % the population of Gaza) and creating a humanitarian crisis as these people lost an access to medical aid, clean water, food or education. Ceasefire in Gaza The ceasefire in Gaza was negotiated with significatn international involvement, particularly from the United States, Egypt, and Qatar. Qatar’s Prime Minister and Foreign Minister, Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdulrahman Al Thani, officially announced the breakthrough on Wednesday, 15th of January 2025. The ceasefire came in force on 19 January and its terms include: This agreement offers a much-needed respite for Gaza’s civilian population, thowever it remains fragile, and its success depends on the commitment of both parties and sustained international pressure. Challenges Facing the Ceasefire in Gaza While the ceasefire is a welcome development, it is far from a resolution. Historically, ceasefires in this conflict didn´t last long, often collapsing into renewed violence. Key challenges include: What Does It Mean for the World? While it may seem that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is resolved now – the months of violence finally come to an end and people from both sides return to their homes – it’s too early to celebrate. So far, only the first phase of the ceasefire has begun. The second phase is still under discussion. Plus the key question of how will Israelis and Palestinains coexist in the future remains unanswered… As much, as we would like to give you a happyend, we can´t (yet). What we can give you, however, are some predictions. It’s not ideal, but that’s the way it goes in history – sometimes you have to wait a long time for definitive results. In the case of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, we’ve been waiting since a 1947…