this post was submitted on 09 Jan 2026
509 points (97.7% liked)

World News

51843 readers
2290 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

US President Donald Trump’s abduction of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro on January 3 has emboldened him to proceed with the annexation of Greenland, a Danish-owned, self-governed territory, spelling the effective end of NATO and furthering Russia’s war aims in Ukraine, experts tell Al Jazeera.

“The move on Venezuela illustrates the Trump administration’s determination to dominate the Western Hemisphere – of which Greenland geographically is a part,” said Anna Wieslander, Northern Europe director for the Atlantic Council, a think tank.

“If the United States decides to attack another NATO country, then everything would stop – that includes NATO and therefore post-World War II security,” Frederiksen said.

“The pandering to Trump has been an element of our strategy over the last year, leaving observers hoping, but not entirely trusting, that another element of the strategy is preparing urgently for the final rupture with the United States,” Giles said.

Giles told Al Jazeera that Europe’s best option was to place a military deterrent on Greenland now, believing that putting allied troops in the Baltic States and Poland after 2017 deterred a Russian attack there.

(page 3) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] DarkSideOfTheMoon@lemmy.world 17 points 1 day ago (13 children)
[–] beveradb@sh.itjust.works 7 points 1 day ago

They are a nation who stereotypically love playing chess...

[–] PalmTreeIsBestTree@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

He could have waited a few more years before his special military operation for his Trojan horse to get back into office. Wouldn’t call him a genius entirely.

load more comments (1 replies)

Calling him a "genius" is overdoing it, i think. He just interpreted the signals of the time, before anyone else did. He guessed correctly that the west is too fractured and weak to defend Ukraine.

load more comments (10 replies)
[–] Yoz@lemmy.world 17 points 1 day ago (2 children)

I think EU should cut off US completely and BRICS should form then EU and BRICS should do trade. Ban all US social media and boycott anything that's made in US

[–] bossito@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago

Europe just finally signed a deal with Mercosur (that's the B in BRICS). Europe is also negotiating one with India. And it's increasing sanctions against Russia. BRICS is just an annual show off conference with zero substance.

[–] SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca 8 points 1 day ago (11 children)

BRICS is just a propaganda thing, it's all it will ever really be. Most trade happens between countries near to one another, though sometimes there's cultural similarities countries can come together on. The BRICS countries are all over the world, they all speak different languages and have very different political systems and interests.

Brazil is a democracy in South America Russia is a fascist regime in Europe and Asia India is a democracy in Central Asia China is a fascist regime (that pretends to be communist) in Asia South Africa is a democracy in Africa

Some of these countries have more trade and closer relations with western countries than with each other. China and India occasionally exchange gunfire over border disputes. Brazil has other trade agreements in South America which are way more meaningful. South Africa is similar.

It's just some fantasy of internet contrarians that have fallen for the "liberal democracies are bad actually" bullshit and want some weird group of countries that are going to... well no one knows.

And LOL at the EU wanting to do trade with Russia right now. Did you even think about what that R in BRICS stood for?

load more comments (11 replies)
[–] abbiistabbii@lemmy.blahaj.zone 14 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I don't think NATO is going to end, I think what's going to happen is NATO is going to turn on America if Greenland gets annexed. That is how I think World War III is going to start.

[–] MehBlah@lemmy.world 12 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Agreed NATO will go on without the US.

[–] BarneyPiccolo@lemmy.today 11 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

Russia doesn't look like the threat they once were. Ukraine has been holding them off all by themselves.

If all the NATO nations (sans USA) got together and raged on Russia, Russia would fall pretty quick.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] ArgumentativeMonotheist@lemmy.world 31 points 2 days ago (3 children)

Maybe America has to be understood as the logical conclusion of Western European geopolitical and moral ideology, and maybe it has to hurt Europeans (I'm French living in the UK, DW, it'll hurt me too but such is life) for us to finally consider some sort of ideological revolution that produces something that's diametrically opposed to what's currently embraced. I mean, it's not like we wouldn't be doing whatever America has been doing for at least 70 years if we had their power level, lol, history shows that clearly, so for this all to end because it must ("THIS SICILIAN THING THAT'S BEEN GOING ON FOR 2000 YEARS!") our minds have to undergo a drastic collective change.

[–] evol@lemmy.today 4 points 1 day ago

Europe is kind of just a retired United States, the pension scheme is the us defense budget

[–] balsoft@lemmy.ml 11 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

TBH the change can be pretty small, albeit revolutionary.

Actually embrace the humanitarian values of enlightenment. Gain some class consciousness. Remove the dictatorship of the capital by seizing the means of production. Consider other peoples of the world as equals and allies rather than dumb weaklings to be taught a lesson and/or exploited.

It all fits in a very long and established european tradition. Remember that Marx, Engels, Liebknecht, Luxemburg, Kropotkin, and Lenin were all europeans.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] N0t_5ure@lemmy.world 22 points 2 days ago (18 children)

Here is how the Greenland issue will likely play out. Trump doesn't live in the real world and is too dumb to see the downside to what he is doing, so he will get Greenland one way or the other. The reasonable people on the other side see this, and have poor options. Either they sell Trump Greenland, notwithstanding all the reasons that this would be improper and unnecessary, or they stand firm and Trump moves in and takes it, which would effectively be an attack on a NATO country and trigger article 5. This would end NATO as we know it, as the U.S. would no longer be part of it (which Russia would love to see). If Denmark sells Greenland to the U.S. to appease Trump, they get some money and the fig leaf of NATO remains, as there is no attack on a NATO country. I believe that the latter course is more likely, as appeasement will disrupt the status quo much less, and history shows that appeasement of fascists is usually the first course of action (see, e.g., Chamberlain's approach towards Nazi Germany in the 1930s.) Of course, this will only embolden Trump and his followers, as it will be seen as Trump's great success.

Incidentally, if Trump were smart, what he would do is immediately start building up the base that the U.S. already has, and then get Denmark to agree to several additional bases, ideally in every town on the island, ostensibly to protect U.S. security interests. Then, use the bases to start pumping money into the local economy. Each base would have construction projects, personnel to feed and entertain, etc., etc. Suddenly, the locals would see dollars flowing into their pockets and their communities prosper. The U.S. could offer each citizen of Greenland $1 million tax free dollars if the country joins the U.S., and pressure Denmark to let Greenland put it to the vote. The population of Greenland is only 56,831, so the cost to purchase would be less than $57 billion. If Denmark balks, simply declare Greenland part of the U.S. and it's citizens U.S. citizens, and make Denmark the bad guy for trying to strip Greenland of it's right of self determination. If it goes to the vote, it seems highly probable that a majority the citizens would take the financial windfall and Greenland would become part of the U.S.. On the outside chance that the citizens voted against their own financial interests, well, the U.S. would already have a ton of military already in place, and show its true colors and take it anyway. With this strategy, the U.S. could at least pretend to be the good guy.

[–] Valmond@lemmy.dbzer0.com 33 points 2 days ago (1 children)

If he was smart then he would just start mining, no one is opposing it.

If he was knowledgeable, he'd know it's a dead end trying to mine stuff up there.

[–] dual_sport_dork@lemmy.world 23 points 2 days ago (3 children)

Nobody cares about mining anything in Greenland. Nobody actually cares about any resource in Greenland, or even the people in Greenland. Not strategically, anyway, before anyone gets it twisted. Rare earths, fine, whatever, that's just a marginal distraction.

Greenland is the fence post on one side of the gate which allows NATO to control Russia's potential naval passage into the Atlantic. At present Russia functionally cannot project any naval force to western Europe without literally going the long way around, all the way around Asia and Africa and past the tip of Cape Town, etc. Not at all coincidentally, the vestiges of the Cold War are why the US has always been so keen to maintain a military presence on Greenland in the first place.

With Greenland out of the picture and the US theoretically also on Russia's side rather than NATO, Putin stands a much greater chance of being able to get his warships into the Atlantic by hugging the coast of Greenland and then subsequently threaten the rest of Europe.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (17 replies)
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›