3 ms·

It's a tough hypothetical to consider because a large number of political realities would have to change on the ground, not least of which is the national pride

It's a tough hypothetical to consider because a large number of political realities would have to change on the ground, not least of which is the national pride argument you made in your terrific article. However, let's assume for the time being that they suddenly want to sell to the highest bidder for whatever imaginary reason. I suspect if sovereignty were up for grabs again, the US would be willing to pay a very significant price to keep it out of the hands of a non-NATO country. $15bn is a small fraction of annual US federal spending. Seems to me paying a slightly larger or even significantly larger figure would be worth it to the US for sovereignty over such a valuable geostrategic location. Plus as you noted, it's likely that climate change could increase the value of the land. Sure, maybe not enough to turn a profit for the buyer, but it would offset the costs of buying to some degree. One particularly interesting implication is that if the US owned both Alaska and Greenland, it could bolster its argument for declaring the northwest passage as international waters in opposition to Canada's territorial waters claim.

fredkbloggs 11y ago
It seems unlikely that they would sell it to an unfriendly power if they did decide to sell. If the Danes view the Greenlanders as their fellow countrymen, it's unfathomable that they would toss them to the Han Chinese cultural extermination squads at any price. Yet they might be able to see their way to a deal with the US or Switzerland or some other relatively benign owner. This doesn't strike me as an absolute argument but one of degree, much like if you asked me whether the US should sell Florida: to whom, I would ask. I'd gladly be rid of it, but it wouldn't do to have it in Russia's hands.
- kethinov 11y ago
  If the Danes wanted a hypothetical something (money, favors, something) badly enough, it's not a completely unreasonable notion that they might entertain selling to a nominally unfriendly power. As I mentioned before, a large number of political realities would have to change on the ground for them domestically for something like that to happen, but assuming that premise I can imagine scenarios where Greenland could fetch well above $15bn.

fredkbloggs 11y ago

It seems unlikely that they would sell it to an unfriendly power if they did decide to sell. If the Danes view the Greenlanders as their fellow countrymen, it's unfathomable that they would toss them to the Han Chinese cultural extermination squads at any price. Yet they might be able to see their way to a deal with the US or Switzerland or some other relatively benign owner. This doesn't strike me as an absolute argument but one of degree, much like if you asked me whether the US should sell Florida: to whom, I would ask. I'd gladly be rid of it, but it wouldn't do to have it in Russia's hands.

kethinov 11y ago
If the Danes wanted a hypothetical something (money, favors, something) badly enough, it's not a completely unreasonable notion that they might entertain selling to a nominally unfriendly power. As I mentioned before, a large number of political realities would have to change on the ground for them domestically for something like that to happen, but assuming that premise I can imagine scenarios where Greenland could fetch well above $15bn.