Why is Trump trifling with small fry? Is it part of his grand strategy to make America great again?

M

ost of our readers view Canada as a friendly nation with a well-established Jewish community, Panama as an exotic destination with a vibrant Jewish presence, and Greenland as an unapproachable island visible only from a distance on the Tel Aviv–New York flight route. I’ll never forget one flight when an El Al pilot opened the public address system to suggest looking out the window because “Greenland looks especially beautiful today.”

For President-elect Trump, these three countries signify something different. Greenland is a big, beautiful island he wants to pry from Denmark. Panama is home to the Panama Canal, which America built from 1903 to 1914 for $300 million and relinquished to Panama by treaty in 1977. Trump says he wants it back. Canada, which sells 75% of its exports to the US, is a primary target for the hefty tariffs Trump plans to impose on America’s largest trading partners.

With all the major foreign policy dilemmas facing the incoming administration, including America’s porous southern border, the chaotic and treacherous Middle East, the interminable war between Russia and Ukraine, and China’s saber-rattling with Taiwan, why is Trump trifling with small fry?

Or is it part of his grand strategy to make America great again?

James Lindsay, a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) who is following the Trump transition, contends that Trump is operating true to the form we saw in his first term. “[He] seems more interested in picking fights with friends than enlisting them in a common cause. And that will make it harder for the United States to succeed in a world of great power competition.”

Other analysts suggest that Trump is reinstating the Monroe doctrine as a foundation of US foreign policy. First promulgated in 1823 by America’s fifth president, James Monroe, the doctrine declared that America’s sphere of influence extended throughout the Western Hemisphere and that the US would no longer tolerate European efforts to colonize Latin and South America.

In 2013, President Obama’s secretary of state, John Kerry, disavowed the two-century-old doctrine, telling a meeting of the Organization of American States, which mainly consists of Latin American nations, that the “era of the Monroe doctrine was over.”

Trump overruled Kerry during his first term. In 2018, when addressing the UN General Assembly, Trump indirectly invoked the Monroe doctrine, stating, “Here in the Western Hemisphere, we are committed to maintaining our independence from the encroachment of expansionist foreign powers.”

Canada, Panama, and Greenland are all part of the Western Hemisphere. Trump, on the cusp of his second term, has now fired warning shots at America’s 21st-century rivals, including China and Russia, to watch their step in America’s backyard.

Competition over Latin America

The dynamic with Canada is slightly different from the other two. When Trump advocated that Canada become America’s 51st state, it was his way of mocking Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, whose political ideology is polar opposite to Trump’s. Trudeau is extremely unpopular and at press time is under intense pressure to quit. He and his party will likely be trounced in this year’s elections, whenever they’re held, by the Conservatives and their new leader, Pierre Poilievre, a conservative far more in tune with Trump.

On the surface, the Panama Canal’s importance seems overinflated. The US is the canal’s largest customer, and Trump rails against the high fees that US ships pay to pass through the 51-mile artificial waterway connecting the Atlantic and Pacific oceans. However, everyone pays the same rate. Panama earns $5 billion annually in transit fees, which accounts for about 6% of its economy. For America, $5 billion is less than a drop in the bucket in a $30 trillion economy.

However, William Freeman, another CFR senior fellow, recently declared that the Panama Canal has much more to offer than its shipping revenues. “In the event of any military conflict with China, it would be needed to move US ships and other assets,” Freeman said.

China, the canal’s second-largest customer, has the same ideas. As South America’s largest trade partner, China is using its economic clout to build political alliances with countries, some of which are hostile to American interests.

Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL) introduced legislation almost three years ago to increase security cooperation in Latin America and the Caribbean to stop transnational criminal organizations from smuggling illegal drugs into America, counter the destabilizing impact of authoritarian regimes, and rein in the malign activities of state actors like China and Russia.

He can be expected to follow up in his new role as secretary of state.

Race for Frigid Battlegrounds

Greenland, too, has strategic military value, then and now. Much of Europe’s stormy weather originates in Greenland and drifts to continental Europe a few days later. According to the Arctic Institute, Nazi Germany stationed four weather stations in Greenland during World War II to gather accurate meteorological data to predict weather patterns and determine the most favorable conditions for launching attacks.

Both Russia and China are eyeing Greenland. In last week’s edition of the US Naval Institute News, John Grady quoted the head of the Russian Navy, Admiral Aleksandr Moiseyev, as saying that the Arctic is “where the confrontation of the world’s leading states is unfolding.”

It’s hard to believe that Russia, stymied in Ukraine and having packed up and abandoned Syria, would be up for any more military adventurism, but don’t underestimate Vladimir Putin. Grady noted that Russia had concentrated its northern fleet of second-strike ballistic missile submarines and strategic bomber forces in the European Arctic. China also manages a fleet of satellites and plans to deploy a large-scale network of listening devices in the Arctic Ocean.

Scott Stephenson, a physical scientist at Rand Corporation, notes that Greenland may have the largest deposits of rare earth minerals outside China.According to the US Geological Survey, rare earth elements are necessary for defense purposes such as lasers and guidance, radar, and sonar systems. Greenland is strategically and centrally located between the North Atlantic and Arctic Oceans, along several shipping routes that are becoming increasingly accessible as sea ice melts. It also has numerous transcontinental flight paths that rely on Greenlandic airspace, as El Al pilots know.

Many countries consider Greenland especially beautiful. Stephenson agrees that US control of the island could also make strategic sense, given Russia’s Arctic military buildup and China’s recent attempts to purchase a naval base and build airports there.

But Greenland holds all the cards, and Denmark has some say.

Denmark, a NATO member, provides Greenland with an annual $670 million subsidy to control its security and foreign policy. With Greenlanders eager for full independence, Denmark recognized Greenland’s right to self-determination, should the matter arise. This means that its 56,000 residents would have to vote in a referendum on any potential territorial transfer.

So Trump isn’t coming out of left field. Neither tweets on X or his lengthy speeches are the place to debate sophisticated aspects of foreign policy. Still, these ideas and others will be discussed in the right circles in cabinet meetings once Trump takes over.

Merely suggesting that Trump is being whimsical in his foreign policy formulation, as the Washington Post indicated over the weekend, or that the MAGA doctrine is an updated version of the Monroe doctrine, is off the mark. Such takes contain some kernels of truth but are far too simplistic in a world that Trump claims is on the brink of World War III, and where, at the very least, American security and economic interests are at risk.

(Originally featured in Mishpacha, Issue 1943)