There is genuine bewilderment in many quarters – not only in Europe but even in Washington DC – as to what on earth President Donald Trump’s bid to take over Greenland from Denmark is all about.

Trump is demanding nothing less than ownership of Greenland, insisting that it is vital for national security. He claims that Russian and Chinese ships are “all over the place” around Greenland although Danish intelligence says they haven’t seen a Chinese ship in a decade and that, apart from an occasional submarine visit, the Russians are absent too. He also says that if the United States (US) doesn’t own Greenland, Russia, or China will take it. And that he won’t allow that for it would mean that they would be right next door to the US.

This ignores the fact that Russia is already right next door to the US: from Alaska you can actually see Russia across the Bering Strait.

When pressed about the national security issue, Trump points to the fact that missiles aimed at the US from Russia, China, or Iran (or presumably North Korea) would have to cross Greenland and it would be essential for the US to have radar facilities there to complement their proposed Golden Dome anti-missile defence. There is also talk of the US needing to have access to the rare earths (and probably oil) found in Greenland, probably together with other minerals. To this the Danes reply that the US is welcome to invest in Greenland and it already has a defence treaty allowing it to place men and military equipment there.

Indeed, at one point, the US had 17 bases in Greenland and now it has only one. Until 2020, this was Thule Air Base but then the US Air Force decided it didn’t really need it, so it became Pituffik Space Base instead with only 100 US personnel there. At one point, there were over a thousand US personnel there. So, the US has been greatly diminishing its defence commitments in Greenland.

This clearly reflects the Pentagon’s view that at present security threats to Greenland are entirely non-existent, which is to say that Trump, as usual, is merely inventing “alternative facts” to bolster his argument.

Angrily replies

To all this Trump angrily replies that none of that matters and that he has to own Greenland. Indeed, he says he only wants to defend things that he owns – although the entire North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) agreement is based on the “all for one, one for all” principle that all members will rally to defend any member under attack. But, for Trump, nothing less than US ownership will do.

Already European countries are moving (miniscule) military forces there as a symbolic way of standing with Denmark and showing that they are willing to stand up to the US. For Europe, this is an existential matter, especially since the US taking Greenland by force would mean the end of NATO. That is something which even the complaisant Republicans in Congress might consider a bridge too far.

So, what is this really all about? The answer is actually quite simple. Every American schoolchild learns how, during the 19th century, there was a powerful and enduring urge under the banner of “Manifest Destiny” for America to expand right across the plains all the way to the Pacific Ocean. Indeed, even the Founding Fathers had this notion, and it was Thomas Jefferson himself who led the way.

In 1791, the Vermont Republic (9 616 square miles) was annexed by the US, and in 1803, Jefferson and James Madison managed to persuade Congress to pay Napoleon $15 million for territory in the Louisiana Purchase. This doubled the size of the US, bringing in another 827 987 square miles. Thereafter there were many other acquisitions – 32 in all – though many were of small Pacific or Caribbean islands (including, one might add, the Danish Virgin Islands, peacefully negotiated with Denmark in 1917).

It is, of course, the really large acquisitions which stick in the mind. The Louisiana Purchase brought in the whole central part of the US. It transformed the country and American settlers began to pour into these new lands – just as European settlers were pouring into America.

At that point the US population was doubling every 20 years. Jefferson, of course, was a man of such genius that his reputation was in any case secure. (When the Kennedy White House held a glittering evening for Nobel Prize winners it was said that it had never seen such an array of talent – except, of course, when Thomas Jefferson dined alone.) Even so, the Louisiana Purchase burnished even his giant reputation.

Critical case

But the critical case was that of James K Polk, a somewhat obscure Tennessee politician – he became governor of the nascent state in 1839 but then lost two gubernatorial elections in 1841 and 1843. He arrived at the Democratic convention before the 1844 presidential election hoping to push his claim as a dark horse candidate for vice president.

However, all the front-rank Democrats were locked in internecine battles. Polk was a fervent follower of Andrew Jackson but was startled when Jackson told him that, in light of the deadlock, Polk should stand for president. Although terming the idea “utterly abortive”, he agreed.

After seven ballots of complete deadlock Polk’s name was put forward, receiving 44 votes, versus the 104 and 114 of the two leading candidates, but gradually he progressed, and to his own great surprise, won the nomination on the 11th ballot.

Following the tradition of the time, Polk did not campaign and made no speeches. His performance was hardly stellar – he failed to win his birth state, North Carolina, or even his supposed base, Tennessee, but the Tammany bosses of Pennsylvania and New York pushed him through. New York was decisive, and to Polk’s great good luck, a Liberty Party (anti-slavery) candidate badly split his opponent’s vote, allowing Polk to squeak through. (Polk, a Southerner, was a slave-owner and a strong slavery advocate.)

Polk was not a very impressive man, and pretty much an accidental president, but luckily his wife, Sarah, was unusually well educated. She read, edited, and partially wrote all his speeches and correspondence. She was also a firm Presbyterian: the drinking of spirits and dancing were strictly forbidden in Polk’s White House. (American Protestants seem to have had a thing about dancing. One sect proscribed sex in a standing-up position “because it leads to dancing”.) Polk worked hard, was very hands-on, and hardly ever left Washington.

The great issue of the day was territorial expansion. American settlers had seized the Mexican state of Texas and declared it an independent republic. There was agitation for it to join the US but that would provoke war with Mexico which was still treating it as just an ill-behaved state.

Meanwhile there was a dispute with Britain over the Oregon territory (i.e. the whole US north-west) with the US wanting the 49th parallel recognised as the border with Canada and Britain resisting. Polk took a tough line on both issues, raising fears of simultaneous wars with Mexico and Britain.

But, in the end, a compromise was reached with Britain by ceding Vancouver Island to it in return for a 49th parallel boundary, while Polk correctly believed the US could beat any Mexican army.

And thus it proved. Under General Zachary Taylor (whom Polk distrusted and who frequently defied presidential orders) the US repeatedly beat the Mexicans and Texas (all 389 166 square miles of it) was annexed while the Oregon territories brought in another 286 541 square miles of territory.

Moreover, as part of the peace agreement, Mexico had to cede another gigantic 529189 square miles of territory. These huge gains essentially completed the expansion of the US into a two-ocean world power.

Seward’s folly

The only remaining major acquisition was the Alaska purchase carried out by William Seward, secretary of State under Abraham Lincoln and Andrew Johnson, in 1867. Seward bought all of Alaska’s 591 000 square miles for just $7.2 million from the Russian czar, who was in financial difficulties in the wake of the Crimean War.

At the time, this purchase of a vast frozen waste was ridiculed as “Seward’s folly”, but Alaska repaid the deal many times over with its timber, oil and gold – and national security. Russia now regards the sale of Alaska as a gigantic national mistake. These huge acquisitions built the America we know, though they were complemented by the much smaller gains of Hawaii and Puerto Rico in 1898 and Guam the next year.

Inevitably, what sticks in the American imagination is the giant expansions brought about by Jefferson, Polk and Seward. Polk was an unremarkable man, but the country expanded most under him. He always promised to be only a one-term president and indeed left office promptly after one term and died soon after of cholera. It is no accident that, in the popularity ratings of the greatest presidents that American historians seem to love to construct, Polk always makes the top 10 and is often higher than that.

And that is really the point. Trump knows very little history, but he cites the Monroe Doctrine and thinks that’s what made Monroe famous. And he knows that the presidents who pulled off the biggest territorial acquisitions are fondly remembered. This is really what the whole ridiculous demand for Greenland is about and why Trump insists that nothing less than 100% ownership will do.

With his rampant egomania he wants to be remembered as one of the few great American presidents who materially enlarged the nation. Just as he is desperate for a Nobel Peace Prize, he wants to have his face on Mount Rushmore. As Trump’s niece, Dr Mary Trump, a psychologist, put it in her book about her uncle’s megalomaniacal tendencies, it’s a case of “too much and never enough”.

It turns out that tariffs aren’t working very well, that Trump’s popularity ratings are way down, that deindustrialisation continues and unemployment is increasing. The outlook for the midterms is so bad that Trump wants to “cancel” those elections, and he fears that a Democrat majority will try to impeach him again – which they well might. So, he has lit on the possibility of another giant territorial acquisition – a real estate dealer’s dream – as the way to ensure that his legacy lives on and is celebrated.

Thus, the Danish suggestions that he can have more military bases in Greenland plus access to its minerals don’t really count with him. Only 100% ownership will do, so he can point to it on a map and say, “Thanks to me it’s now ours: Trumpland.” As usual, he is trying to get his way by bullying: he’s threatening extra tariffs against any country that doesn’t support his “Greenland policy”.

Opposition

It won’t work. Europe can’t afford to back down, and meanwhile, opposition to this mad scheme is growing even among Republicans. Ultimately, even they don’t believe it’s worth sacrificing NATO simply to placate Trump’s boundless vanity. And the polls show that only 4% of American voters would support the use of force to grab Greenland, making Trump’s threat to do so pretty empty.

The question now is really when Trump will realise that he’s not going to get his way over Greenland, and how he is going to react at that moment of truth.

Meanwhile, having enjoyed a sugar high over Maduro’s kidnapping, Trump is talking of other foreign adventures in Panama, Mexico, and Colombia. It is fundamentally easier to throw America’s weight around in Central America, in “our hemisphere”.

Also, having bludgeoned Ukraine’s Volodymyr Zelenskyy with demands that he call an election, Trump was firmly told that the postponement of elections was quite normal in countries which were at war. This may well have given him an idea about how he might cancel or postpone the midterms.