Greenland’s desire for independence is a fight based on rhetoric and laws
Is China’s interest in the resources below the surface of Greenland a good or a bad thing? That depends on who you ask. The Greenlanders who are ready for independence view the huge investments as their path towards breaking free of the financial support Greenland receives from Denmark and thus an opportunity to leave the Danish Realm. However, the Act on Greenland Self-Government of 2009 still leaves Denmark in control of Greenland’s foreign affairs and security policy, and this can be a stumbling block for the ambitions of freedom.
“If Danish politicians assess that the selling of minerals is not only an export activity, but also a security issue, then Denmark is in charge. This is a legitimate enforcement of the Act on Greenland Self-Government, but it’s not that popular in Greenland. The last 10 years of a legal struggle concerning the export rights for uranium have demonstrated that,” says Rasmus Kjærgaard Rasmussen, researcher in security controversies and arctic issues at the Department of Communication and Arts at Roskilde University.
His narratological analysis of the controversy over uranium export between Nuuk and Copenhagen has demonstrated that both parties are playing both a legal and a rhetorical game. The research project is built on an analysis of a large amount of official documents from the governments of Greenland and Denmark in the period from the Act on Greenland Self-Government in 2008/2009 to 2016. Here strategies for the development of the Danish Realm and Greenland’s economy have been analysed in conjunction with legislative proposals and other plans for exploitation of Greenland’s raw materials and minerals.
“In some contexts, Denmark has an interest in positioning the Danish Realm as an arctic superpower. The Danish Realm, consisting of Denmark, the Faroe Islands and Greenland, together amounts to the third largest land mass in NATO. That narrative is a core part of Denmark’s foreign policy establishment in the Prime Minister’s Office and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs who for a number of years have played the so-called ‘Greenland Card’ to gain influence in Washington. In the Danish version of the narrative, China is a threat to the Danish Realm and therefore the export of uranium and rare earth minerals (REE) is a top-level security policy issue,” explains Rasmus Kjærgaard Rasmussen.
Fear of having an image as a colonial power
When the Danish senior diplomat, Peter Taksøe-Jensen, published his review of Danish foreign policy in 2016, one of his recommendations was that Denmark should “... use its position as an arctic superpower for the benefit of the Danish Realm, the region, and the people of Greenland and the Faroe Islands.” Such rhetoric can open doors in the United States, but it can also lead to political problems since Greenland can use such rhetoric as proof that Denmark is still acting like a colonial power – something which the Danish state wants to avoid being portrayed as at all costs.
“The official line is that Greenland is supported in its efforts to become independent. That line is backed by pretty much every party in the Danish Parliament. On the other hand, our analysis shows that the civil service and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs is acting in a more ambivalent manner when the policy is carried out in practice via various agreements and strategy papers. Here, underground mineral resources are almost automatically spoken of in a security policy context. But when Denmark emphasis the security arguments too quickly, this feed the independence parties in Greenland because it reinforces the image of Denmark as a modern colonial power mostly interested in maintaining control of a joint Danish-Greenlandic foreign policy and the valuable ‘Greenland Card’”, says Rasmus Kjærgaard Rasmussen.
Most recently, the Minister for Foreign Affairs at the time, Vittus Qujaukitsoq, reacted strongly to the Danish Government’s blocking of a Chinese investment in the closed military base, Grønnedal. Likewise, Aleqa Hammond, a member of parliament representing Greenland and the former chairman of Greenland’s Self-Government, stated during the summer’s parliamentary debate on Chinese investments in airports that Denmark was using a double standard by trading with China itself and then throwing down the ‘national security’ card as soon as the Chinese showed an interest in Greenland.
“She implicitly accuses Denmark of still acting as a colonial power and using foreign policy and security policy concerns as a pretence. From the Danish side, the communication is therefore about avoiding conflict over the distribution of responsibilities in the Danish Realm, so in this specific case Lars Løkke Rasmussen (the Danish Prime Minister) replied that Denmark would need to look at the security policy issues and referred to the Act on Greenland Self-Government. The Danish rhetoric is very much based on constitutional law considerations, while the rhetoric from Greenland is often part of a larger nationalistic narrative based on symbolic politics,” Rasmus Kjærgaard Rasmussen assesses.
Supporters and opponents
While the Danes are trying to balance constitutional law issues, foreign policy strategies and a moral obligation to support Greenland’s independence, Greenland’s Self-Government portrays it more actively as a larger narrative dealing with independence. This is what the rhetoric is about - who the supporters and opponents are. Rasmus Kjærgaard Rasmussen points out:
“Right now, Denmark is being portrayed as the opponent, while China is the supporter. It is a narrative that is an extension of the identity that some parts of the Greenlandic society has constructed, of being a former colony and an oppressed people, and this has traditionally helped advance the agenda of those fighting for independence.”
However, even if this Greenlandic narrative has been dominant in the debate, it is not necessarily true on closer scrutiny.
“It’s more wishful thinking than reality, and it is advanced by seasoned idealists and a political elite among the pro-independence parties. It is based on an idea that China will build mines, bring in a lot of dollars and offer cheap loans for investments and all without this being a risk. I doubt that it’s realistic,” says Rasmus Kjærgaard Rasmussen, at the same time pointing out that the independence agenda is also not equally popular among everyone in Greenland.
For example, a survey from 2016 showed that it was particularly the middle-aged Greenlanders who were pro-independence, while 29 percent of the young people between the ages of 18 to 29 did not have any opinion at all on the subject.
A need for a constructive dialogue
Viewed from the outside, it can be difficult to get an overview of what is a legal issue, what is a fact, what is rhetoric and what is emotions in the political game surrounding Greenland’s future inside or outside the Danish Realm. Therefore, according to Rasmus Kjærgaard Rasmussen, both media outlets and researchers need to step up and participate more actively in the debate. The Danish media’s coverage of the April 2018 elections in Greenland was a good example of this:
“It shows that Danish observers have begun to take an interest in Greenland. It’s also important that researchers get engaged and build bridges between Greenland and Denmark and show the people of Greenland what the Danish Realm can offer in terms of education and research. Roskilde University is now playing a role in the Forum for Arctic Research which, among other things, coordinates research in Greenland-related issues with the university in Nuuk. At the same time, we here at home need to have a proper debate about what Greenland is and what it means for Denmark in the here and now,” he emphasis. Perhaps Greenland’s future is neither one of complete independence or being completely bound to Denmark:
“We need to move past the stereotypical image of a parent and child relationship and towards a constructive dialogue about the two countries being equal partners with strong historical ties.”
Published in the recognised journal ‘Tidsskriftet Politik’:
Rasmus Kjærgaard Rasmussen and Associate Professor Henrik Merkelsen from Lund University have described their research results dealing with the security interactions between Greenland and Denmark in the recognised journal ‘Tidsskriftet Politik’ under the title ‘Post-colonial governance through securitization? A narratological analysis of a securitization controversy in contemporary Danish and Greenlandic uranium policy’.