A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Forum

By Anil Madan

A dog sees a car, starts barking and runs after it, full tilt. At some point, we have all wondered: what if the dog caught the car?

At Davos, we saw world leaders, all earnest, barking up the wrong tree. Never have so many, so badly assessed a situation. Or was it that their display of panic and hysteria actually defused a crisis — one that might otherwise have morphed into the end of NATO, the Western alliance, and the rules-based order? Indeed, it could have signaled the end of any expectation that those entrusted with great power will wield it with a commensurate sense of responsibility.

Trump at Davos Forum. Pic First Po

Were we witnessing the end of gravitas itself? And how do you bring an escaped gravitas balloon, seemingly filled with the helium of hubris, down to earth?

The atmosphere at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, was charged. President Donald Trump was coming to town, and he was running after Greenland. In fact, he had refused to rule out the use of force to satisfy his acquisitive thirst for Greenland.

The Gods of imperialism have a sense of humor. They weren’t cooperating. First, there was a minor electrical problem with the aircraft designated Air Force One carrying the President on his mission, a latter-day Joan of Arc carrying the banner to the conquest. After all, he had circulated a meme with the US flag covering the US mainland, Greenland, Venezuela, and Canada to boot. The aircraft turned around mid-flight and returned to base — Joint Base Andrews. A suitable replacement aircraft was fueled and left for a second try. It is not known whether the replacement aircraft once flew under the Qatari banner of an Arab Jamila of Arc.

In the meantime, at ground level in Davos, there was nothing short of hysteria. Let us take a sampling.

Bernd Lange, chair of the European Parliament’s Committee on International Trade that must approve the EU-US trade deal negotiated last year before being presented for a final vote before the full parliament, said there is “no alternative” but suspend the deal because of threats over Greenland. He added that European Parliament is clear in its “unshakable commitment to the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Denmark and Greenland”.

President Macron of France lamented a shift towards autocracy, against democracy, indeed a shift towards a world without rules, where international law is trampled underfoot and the desires of the mighty prevail. He saw imperial ambitions resurfacing and the end of collective governance and multilateralism. Competition from the US and China was replacing cooperation and common interest. Macron reaffirmed the attachment of France and Europe to national sovereignty and independence, to the United Nations. In this context, he recalled the lessons of WWII and explained thus, France’s decision to join a mutual exercise in Greenland without threatening anyone, but just supporting an ally and another European country, Denmark.

Canada’s Prime Minister Mark Carney gave what one commentator characterized as a stem-winder of a speech. And it was all of that. Carney said that we are seeing a rupture in the world order, not a transition and this is the end of a pleasant fiction and the beginning of a harsh reality where powerful nations have no limits, no constraints.

But Carney was defiant, saying that Canada and other intermediate powers are not powerless, they have the capacity to build a new order “that encompasses our values, such as respect for human rights, sustainable development, solidarity, sovereignty and territorial integrity of the various states.”

In a not so-veiled chip shot south, he declared: “The power of the less powerful; starts with honesty.”

Carney invoked the aphorism of Thucydides that with the rules-based order fading, the strong can do what they can, and the weak must suffer what they must.

With uncharacteristic but not unexpected bravado from a Canadian, he gave counsel: Going along and showing compliance will neither avoid trouble nor buy safety.

In speaking about options, he cited an essay by Czech dissident and later president Václav Havel on ‘The Power of the Powerless’. Living within a lie is unacceptable. “The system’s power comes not from its truth, but from everyone’s willingness to perform as if it were true, and its fragility comes from the same source.” When there is a refusal by even one to comply, the illusion begins to crack.

And so, Mark Carney proclaimed that it is time for middle powers to end this. “[Canada] knew the story of the international rules-based order was partially false that the strongest would exempt themselves when convenient, that trade rules were enforced asymmetrically. And we knew that international law applied with varying rigor depending on the identity of the accused or the victim.”

“This fiction was useful, and American hegemony, in particular, helped provide public goods, open sea lanes, a stable financial system, collective security and support for frameworks for resolving disputes.”

He concluded: “This bargain no longer works. Let me be direct. We are in the midst of a rupture, not a transition.”

A country that can’t feed itself, fuel itself or defend itself, has few options. When the rules no longer protect you, you must protect yourself. But Carney was clear eyed about where this leads: “A world of fortresses will be poorer, more fragile and less sustainable. And there is another truth. If great powers abandon even the pretense of rules and values for the unhindered pursuit of their power and interests, the gains from transactionalism will become harder to replicate.”

Mr Carney drew a standing ovation.

As might be expected, Ursula von der Leyen and British PM Keir Starmer also decried the end of the orderly order.

In contrast, NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte acknowledged the security challenges confronting the West: “When it comes to the Arctic, I think President Trump is right,” Rutte said in a video address. But he also gave a nod to Europeans views: “Other leaders of NATO are right.”

“We need to defend the Arctic. We know that the sea lanes are opening up. We know that China and Russia are increasingly active in the Arctic,” he said.

“There are eight countries bordering the Arctic. Seven are members of NATO,” he said, listing Finland, Norway, Denmark, Sweden, Iceland, Canada, and the United States. “The only nation with an Arctic border outside of NATO is Russia,” adding that a ninth country, China, is increasingly active in the Arctic region.

So, this was the car that Trump was chasing. And he too seemed clear-eyed that not only had he failed to catch it, but that he really wanted nothing to do with catching it. Mr. Trump is adroit at reading polls. If it was not clear before the first takeoff from Joint Base Andrews, the return flight was an omen that there was little support for the use of force either in Europe or at home.

Trump’s lengthy, way too long speech, at Davos got off with what seemed a plaintive embrace: “The United States cares greatly about the people of Europe. We really do. I mean, look, I am derived from Europe. Scotland and Germany, 100 percent Scotland, my mother, 100 percent German, my father. And we believe deeply in the bonds we share with Europe as a civilization. I want to see it do great.”

This was no Viking warrior coming to raid, no Hun coming to raid and ravage. This was a man invoking his own heritage to forge a common bond. It was a deft correction of his earlier error of belligerence.

But there was also a sense of outrage and despair in the embrace. The Europeans and Scots are destroying themselves, he complained. This echoed his National Security Strategy recently published.

The first part of Mr Trump’s speech was long and covered a range of topics, mostly about perceived accomplishments of his second term. Then he elevated Greenland to a prime spot in terms of national security. He did not clarify that he was talking of America’s national security, or perhaps of Denmark’s or Europe’s national security. It was left hanging.

Then the tone of the apologia coupled with apology returned. Mr Trump has tremendous respect for both the people of Greenland and the people of Denmark. Didn’t you know? Never mind the details. Because there is no nation or group of nations is in any position to be able to secure Greenland other than the United States.

Mr Trump then went back to WWII but after glorifying America for having defended Greenland on behalf of Denmark, he went on: “And then after the war, which we won – we won it big. Without us, right now, you’d all be speaking German and a little Japanese, perhaps. After the war, we gave Greenland back to Denmark. How stupid were we to do that? But we did it. But we gave it back. But how ungrateful are they now?”

Now, we seemed to have come full circle. The Danes and Greenlanders were ungrateful.

At this point, Mr Trump turned to justifying his quest for Greenland: “We need it for strategic national security and international security.”

Note the expression of self-interest coupled with the noble goal of protecting the interests of allies. And then he allowed that Greenland is “actually part of North America on the northern frontier of the Western Hemisphere. That’s our territory. It is, therefore, a core national security interest of the United States of America. And in fact, it’s been our policy for hundreds of years to prevent outside threats from entering our hemisphere.” This was an invocation of the recently published National Security Strategy, the Monroe Doctrine extended, and the so-called modern-day Donroe doctrine.

Mr Trump went on to review his perception of historical attempts by American presidents to acquire Greenland. America alone can protect this piece of land which is mostly ice. Then Trump pivoted to declare that as the reason “I’m seeking immediate negotiations to once again discuss the acquisition of Greenland by the United States.”

The acquisition would not be a threat to NATO. And then he lamented that the US is treated very unfairly by NATO.

Admitting that he has been a critic of NATO for many years, he hailed himself as the greatest benefactor of the alliance: “I’ve done more to help NATO than any other President by far, than any other person. You wouldn’t have NATO if I didn’t get involved in my first term.”

Then came the stunning statements: “We probably won’t get anything unless I decide to use excessive strength and force where we would be, frankly, unstoppable. But I don’t want to do that. OK, now everyone’s saying, oh, good. That’s probably the biggest statement I made because people thought I would use force. I don’t have to use force. I don’t want to use force. I won’t use force.”

At this point, he turned the quest into a respectful request for Greenland.

The goal is to provide security through a missile defense system which, he argues, will ‘by its very nature’ defend Canada. So much for Mark Carney’s supposed ingratitude.

Trump made a special point of addressing Carney: “Canada gets a lot of freebies from us, by the way. They should be grateful also. But they’re not. I watched your prime minister yesterday. He wasn’t so grateful. They should be grateful to us. Canada. Canada lives because of the United States. Remember that, Mark, the next time you make your statements.”

And thus, the crisis that had built to a crescendo was defused. All said, there was a bit of bark, but no bite.

On the other hand, the western alliance was indeed ruptured.

Later that afternoon, Mr Trump announced that he had “formed the framework of a future deal” with respect to Greenland with Rutte.

Danish foreign minister Rasmussen said: “The day ended better than it started.” And making it clear that there is no finality to the discussions, he added: “Now, let’s sit down and find out how we can address the American security concerns in the Arctic while respecting the red lines of the Kingdom of Denmark.”

Italy’s prime minister, Giorgia Meloni, welcomed Trump’s retreat from the ledge. Rutte was more nuanced and cautious, saying there is “a lot of work to be done”.

We are left wondering if the western alliance is fractured and NATO undone, or if an entirely new love affair is in the offing. Your guess is as good as mine.

Cheerz…
Bwana

Mauritius Times ePaper Friday 23 January 2026