In today’s episode of **Dave Talks Politics**:
* Trump’s Greenland Gambit Ties to Monroe Doctrine
* Potential NATO Unwind – Putin’s Dream, EU’s Nightmare?
If you’re new to the channel, hey, take a moment, subscribe to the channel, then hit the bell to be alerted about new episodes when they drop.
1. **Recapping the Greenland drama – FT and Fox context**
- Building on last episode: Trump’s Jan 2026 tariff threats (10% rising to 25%) on eight EU nations unless they greenlight a US takeover of Greenland from Denmark – framed as national security for polar dominance and resources.
- FT (Jan 17, 2026): Highlights how this divides Europe, with leaders like von der Leyen and Macron slamming it as blackmail, risking NATO fractures. Protests in Denmark/Greenland underscore sovereignty backlash.
- Fox transcript (Jan 17, 2026): Miller pushes the “raw deal” narrative – US taxpayers fund Europe’s defense, Denmark can’t protect Greenland’s vast size (25% bigger than Alaska), so it should be ours.
- Significance: This isn’t just about ice and minerals; it’s a test of US leverage in a multipolar world.
2. **Tying in the Monroe Doctrine – a 19th-century flip?**
- Monroe Doctrine (1823): US policy warning Europe against colonizing the Western Hemisphere – basically, “Americas for Americans,” keeping old-world powers out of our backyard.
- Trump’s twist: Sources suggest he’s rehashing a “Trump Corollary” to Monroe, but applying it inversely – pulling US out of Europe’s “hemisphere” to focus on American interests, like Arctic grabs (Greenland) or Venezuela oil. Greenland isn’t technically Western Hemisphere (it’s North Atlantic/Arctic), but critics scream it’s an extension via security ties.
- FT/WUNC (Jan 14, 2026): Trump’s “America First” echoes 19th-century isolationism, upending post-WWII order – withdraw from overcommitments abroad.
- Riff material: If Monroe kept Europe out of the Americas, Trump’s version says “Yankees go home” from Europe – but on US terms, forcing allies to beg or break.
3. **Potential US withdrawal from European bases – the “go home Yankee” trap**
- Scenario: If EU pushes back hard on Greenland (e.g., blocking tariffs or deals), Trump could threaten/pull US troops from European bases (e.g., Germany, Italy) – over 80,000 personnel as of 2025.
- Not Western Hemisphere, sure, but Europeans might argue Arctic ties make it “hemispheric” security – sources warn this strains NATO to breaking point.
- Just Security (Jan 16, 2026): Trump’s threats risk “destroying NATO itself” via withdrawal or invasion rhetoric – a little-known statute might block military action on Greenland.
- Economic angle: Pullout means Europe foots its own defense bill – no more “free ride” on US blood and treasure, as Miller puts it.
4. **Russia’s view – unwinding NATO from the inside**
- Putin’s lens: This plays as EU self-sabotage – if they insist on “US go home” over Greenland, it unwinds NATO without Russia lifting a finger. Divisions weaken the alliance, easing pressure on Ukraine.
- FT (Jan 17, 2026): Ex-NATO chief Rasmussen calls it a “weapon of mass distraction” aiding Russia/China – Trump’s “gangster” tactics hand Putin a win by fracturing the West.
- Broader: Sources note Russia/China eyeing Arctic resources/naval routes – US control of Greenland plugs a “big hole,” but at the cost of alienating allies, making Putin smile as NATO erodes.
- Riff material: Putin happy, USA refocused on its backyard, EU pounding sand in a cold war without US backup – poetic justice for sanctions blowback?
5. **Is this the real motivation? – A calculated play for isolationism**
- Theory checks out: Sources tie Trump’s Greenland push to broader “America First” reset – not just resources, but forcing Europe to stand alone, unwinding entanglements like NATO on US terms. Refusing to rule out NATO exit over this fits the pattern.
- Deep state angle: “Establishment” (State Dept, intel agencies) resists via leaks/lawsuits – Trump could use executive orders to bypass, as planned since 2019 Greenland floated.
- Brookings (Dec 2025): Trump’s 2025 strategy includes a Monroe “corollary” critiquing endless alliances – this could be the unwind button.
- Yes, likely motivation: Test EU resolve, expose “freeloading,” and pivot US to hemisphere dominance while rivals exploit the chaos.
6. **Keeping the deep state on a tight leash – implementation hurdles**
- How: Appoint loyalists (e.g., Rubio as SecState, Whitaker as NATO ambassador) to execute – sources show early talks with Denmark via Rubio. Use tariffs/executive actions to sideline bureaucrats.
- Leash tactics: Purges of “disloyal” officials (as in first term), classify Greenland as natsec priority to limit leaks – but Congress could intervene via funding cuts or statutes.
- Risks: Deep state pushback via media (e.g., FT exposés) or courts – Trump needs quick wins to build momentum.
- For beginners: “Deep state” = entrenched bureaucracy resisting outsider agendas – Trump tames it with firings and loyal picks.
7. **Timeline crunch – enough time before midterms?**
- Midterms: Nov 3, 2026 (first Tuesday after first Monday) – from Jan 18, 2026, that’s about 9.5 months to implement.
- Feasible? Tariffs kick in Feb/June 2026 per threats – if EU caves or escalates, unwind could accelerate pre-election to rally base on “tough deals.”
- Hurdles: Legal challenges, ally negotiations drag – but Trump’s Day 1 executive orders (e.g., reinstating first-term policies) show speed is key.
- Riff material: Midterms as referendum – if Greenland “win” by summer, boosts GOP; if mess, deep state sabotage could flip House/Senate.
8. **Trump and Wiles’ long-game planning – since the first term?**
- Susie Wiles: Trump’s co-manager turned Chief of Staff – sources confirm she’s architecting quick executive actions, drawing from 2017-2021 playbook.
- Greenland origins: Trump first eyed it in 2019 (first term) for security/resources – Wiles, involved since 2024 campaign, likely refined it for 2025 strategy.
- Evidence: ABC News (Jan 17, 2026): One year in, Trump’s jaw-dropping promises (including Greenland tariffs) trace to campaign vows – Wiles tells donors it’s Day 1 priority.
- Yes, planned: Ties to first-term NATO spending fights – this is escalation, using Greenland as wedge to force realignment.
9. **Economic and global fallout – who wins, who loses**
- US: Gains Arctic edge, sheds “subsidies” – but risks trade wars, higher consumer prices.
- EU: Vulnerable to blackmail, forced rearmament without US shield.
- Russia/China: Exploit divisions – FT notes Trump’s push hurts alliances more than helps security.
- Broader: Monroe flip could isolate US, boosting rivals’ soft power.
10. **Counterarguments – not just a ploy?**
- Some sources: Genuine natsec (polar competition) – but tactics scream coercion.
- Europe overreacts? NATO ambassador says so, but threats real.
- Politico (Jan 9, 2026): Trump thinks he holds cards from past NATO wins – but this could backfire.
- Riff material: If motivation is unwind, it’s genius chaos – or reckless hubris.
11. **What this means for the West – a new order emerging?**
- If real play: US retreats to hemisphere, NATO frays, multipolar world accelerates – Putin toasts, EU scrambles, America “alone but first.”
OK team, so what does all this mean? Well, it means Trump’s Greenland-Monroe mashup could be a sly unwind of NATO – forcing EU to push US out, delighting Putin and refocusing America, but at the risk of global isolation. Deep state leashed via loyalists, timeline tight pre-Nov 3 midterms, and yeah, echoes first-term planning with Wiles steering.
Now lets do 3 questions with dave:
1. If Trump’s flipping Monroe to yank US from Europe over Greenland, is this masterstroke isolationism – or suicidal alliance-busting that hands wins to Putin?
2. With 9 months to midterms, can Trump/Wiles implement this deep state-proof – or will leaks and laws derail the unwind?
3. Real motivation or resource grab? If planned since 2019, does this make Trump a strategic genius – or just a 19th-century throwback?
