Mike Baker

In plain English, that comes across like this is what happens when I don't get my trophy.

It's not a good look.

There's another issue that complicates the argument even further.

The U.S.

already enjoys extensive access to Greenland under existing agreements.

Yes, we have existing agreements in place.

Under the 1951 U.S.-Denmark Defense Agreement, it's a Cold War-era deal that remains in force, the U.S.

has broad rights to operate, maintain, and expand military facilities in Greenland.

That agreement is the backbone of America's Arctic security presence.

It's what allows the U.S.

to operate Bidefik space-based today.

See, I pronounced it correctly again, Bidefik.

I just can't stop saying it.

It grants wide latitude to move personnel, aircraft, and equipment in and out of Greenland, and to build or upgrade infrastructure as defense needs require.

Denmark must be consulted, but it does not exercise routine obstruction.

Because Denmark is a NATO member, U.S.

operations in Greenland are embedded within the alliance framework.

Functionally speaking, Greenland already operates as part of NATO's Northern Defensive Shield.

In other words, the US already has most of the access it needs, without owning the island.

What's more, the US military footprint in Greenland has shrunk dramatically since the Cold War.