Greenland, Fire and Ice

Trump's Greenland gambit & natural disaster coverage.

Jan 11, 2025

Good evening,

For you newbies out there, welcome to Outsider on the Inside. I hope this dispatch from in and around the nation’s capital on underreported topics finds you well.

If you’re just discovering my musings, here’s a backgrounder and make sure we’re connected on Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, and YouTube.

Quick Thoughts

Support and follow the work of IWF’s Center for Energy and Conservation today if you haven’t already.

My parents celebrated their 39th Freedomversary in the U.S. this week.

The Paramount+ series, Landman, isn’t fossil fuel propaganda. C’mon!

New Music Friday: “Nobody Knows Your Love” by Madison Hughes and Brett Cobbs.

That’s all for now. Stay tuned for next Friday’s dispatch.

Trump Eyes Greenland

Today at Townhall, I did a deep dive into Greenland and the U.S. making a play for the Arctic under Trump 2.0.

It’s easy to dismiss this as trolling; I think it’s a smart play to assert ourselves in the Arctic. The WSJ Editorial Board even warmed up to the idea, writing, “A Greenland deal has potential if he’s [Trump’s] artful.”
This is not the first time President Trump, a real estate developer, has seriously entertained buying Greenland. In 2019, his administration explored the move quite seriously - citing national security concerns. It prompted a response from a defiant Greenland Ministry of Foreign Affairs that posted the following statement on its Twitter/X account: “Greenland is rich in valuable resources such as minerals, the purest water and ice, fish stocks, seafood, renewable energy and is a new frontier for adventure tourism. We're open for business, not for sale.”

Trump, however, isn’t the first America to eye Greenland. I was surprised to learn former U.S. Secretary of State William Seward, who famously purchased the Alaska Territory (present-day Alaska) from Russia in 1867, eyeing the Danish territory too. I explained:

Trump, believe it or not, isn’t the first president or elected U.S. official to propose buying Greenland. William Seward, the Secretary of State responsible for purchasing Alaska from Russia in 1867, commissioned a report in 1868 titled, “A Report on the Resources of Iceland and Greenland.”
“In considering the future of Greenland, we cannot confine ourselves entirely to materialistic considerations…If a country has in it the means of developing man in any way, physically or mentally, it may be said to be rich to that extent…,” the report explained, “Even if we had no hope of finding there a place for settlement or new roads to profit, there are still strong reasons why civilization should strive to reach and explore them. They possess, as it were, the key to many problems of science, and the answer to many questions which are at present discussed by geographers. Certainly, new truths are as precious acquisitions as new mines or new fishing grounds, and a country which has supplied them has enriched the world as much as one which sends us the means of indulging our tastes or satisfying our appetites."

Let’s be honest. It’s unlikely President-elect Trump purchases Greenland. But there is an existing agreement between the U.S. and Denmark that can, perhaps, be renegotiated to our benefit.

The autonomous territory also houses our Pituffik Space Base. Additionally, our nation currently enjoys defense cooperation and basing rights with Denmark under the Defense of Greenland Agreement to the “benefit of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO).” The DGA was officially signed on April 27, 1951. President-elect Trump, a master negotiator, could renegotiate the terms of DGA with the King of Denmark that are more amenable to U.S. interests in his second term.

What do you think of president-elect Trump’s Greeland gambit?

Fire and Ice Engulf America

2025 began on a wild note, with natural disasters being front and center this week.

Monday began with the Midwest and East Coast (where I reside) being pummeled with Winter Storm Blair. Tennessee, Georgia, and Texas got some rare snow showing today.

Related news coverage, of course, blamed this cold snap on global warming and not it being - ahem- winter.

The author poses in front of her house in Northern Virginia during Winter Storm Blair. | January 6, 2025

Out West, our friends in Los Angeles, California are enduring multiple high-intensity wildfires that have left untold amounts of destruction - upwards of $57B in damage - behind. Many are invoking climate change. It’s what they default to. But let’s clear the air: live fuel buildup and humans are the primary drivers behind high-intensity wildfires out West. Not to mention, L.A. County and the Newsom administration have bungled water policy by refusing to construct new or adequately fill existing reservoirs. A corresponding 2014 bond measure has yet to be fully enacted.

California is fire prone. Government officials were given advanced notice to prepare accordingly. Yet they failed to do their jobs. So they blame climate change and president-elect Trump.

Can’t we just have fair and balanced weather coverage for once? And see affected people get the relief and help they need? California, my home state, needs to get its act together on proactive forest management and boosting water infrastructure. It shouldn’t take major catastrophic events to force change.