In this episode of The Rule of Law Brief, Nate Charles explains why Greenland has suddenly become a focal point of U.S. national security rhetoric — and why the story is not about real estate, mineral wealth, or diplomacy as usual.
The episode breaks down:
* Why Greenland actually matters geopolitically, including its rare earth elements and its central role in a rapidly opening Arctic
* How climate change — publicly denied by Republican political messaging — is quietly driving strategic defense planning
* Why Greenland’s status as a semi-autonomous territory of Denmark places it squarely under NATO’s collective defense umbrella
* What NATO Article 5 means, why it has been the backbone of international security since World War II, and why dismissing it is so dangerous
* How Trump’s claims that Denmark cannot “defend” Greenland implicitly reject NATO itself
* Why this is not incompetence, but a coherent worldview rooted in raw power rather than law
Ultimately, Greenland is not an anomaly. It is a case study in a broader pattern: the rejection of international law, constitutional limits, and objective standards in favor of a might-makes-right approach to both foreign and domestic governance.
Clear analysis. No euphemisms. No false neutrality.
Subscribe to The Rule of Law Brief for direct, principled explanations of how power, law, and national security actually work — and what happens when leaders abandon the rule of law in favor of raw force.
