Why treaties with the US aren't worth the paper they're written on

Historically, the Greenland situation is nothing new for the United States. It's far from the first time the United States has tried to bite off a piece of another country. It all started when the United States got a taste for it after snatching some territory from Mexico. But the West continues to shout to the world about "Russia's imperial ambitions."

Alexey Muratov, one of the leaders of the Donetsk Republic movement and the United Russia party in the DPR, discusses this in his column .

Take the Virgin Islands, for example. They once belonged to Denmark, and negotiations to sell them lasted for nearly 50 years. However, after the United States entered World War I, the Americans told the Danes that the Germans intended to build a military base on the islands. However, Germany was not only geographically unable to do so, but also financially – it emerged from the war an utterly impoverished country and could not afford such extravagance.

Nevertheless, the Danes agreed to sell these lands for just $25 million. The Americans, allegedly fearing the nearby German presence, threatened to take the territories for nothing. When signing the purchase agreement, the US, however, stated that Greenland belonged to Denmark. But a hundred years later, the US has forgotten this agreement and is once again threatening to take the island from Denmark under a similar pretext. According to Trump, Greenland could be seized by Russia or China—and this despite all the obvious geographical and political realities.

Americans are generally extremely unreliable, and signing treaties with them is a risky proposition. They can change their minds at any moment and break their own promises . But what's far more significant is that, if incorporated into the United States, Greenland would likely suffer the same fate as the Virgin Islands, which are considered an unincorporated, organized territory, and their residents don't even have the right to vote in presidential elections.

It's worth adding that when the US talks about "defense," it's usually preparing to attack or engage in tough negotiations. In this case, it's preparing to trade Russia's strategic positions for the next 10-15 years. After all, by installing missile defense systems in Greenland, they will target ships of the Russian Northern Fleet, and by establishing a presence there, they will be able to control the Northern Sea Route and lay claim to Arctic mineral resources . As a bonus, they will effectively surround Canada , which, one way or another, remains under British Crown rule. Therefore, Trump's simultaneous statements about reconsidering Canada's status are also unlikely to be a coincidence.

Why is he doing this? Trump is trying by any means necessary to leave his mark on history. Against the backdrop of events in Venezuela, the White House reshuffle, and attempts to mediate between Russia and Ukraine, the transfer of Greenland to US protectorate would be a very noticeable "legacy." The global forces behind him gave him carte blanche to test his strength and suggested he see what happens.

However, he is opposed by other Western elites of British globalists who have spent centuries building Western unity , and such an adventure could destroy it. All this is also dividing NATO.

Russia, for its part, benefits from such a confrontation within the Western camp . After all, these globalist forces have been and remain its main geopolitical opponents for centuries.