Der Tagesspiegel berichtet, dass die CDU im Kreis Borken die CDU in Charlottenburg-Wilmersdorf mit 20.000 Euro bezuschusst. Warum? Und was hat Jens Spahn damit zu tun?

In this video, I discuss why Donald Trump wants ownership of Greenland, and how Europe should respond to the pressure. Watch the video on the website or read the transcript below. Best, Anders * * * ### _Transcript:_ I've been reluctant to comment on the situation about Greenland for a couple of reasons. The first one is that at one level, this story is just too stupid. It's a ridiculous crisis. So, I felt it was hard to add all that much aside from pointing out that it's stupid. And the second reason is that it's a developing story. There is a lot of coverage of it in the mainstream media. So, it's hard as a YouTuber to comment on these things because whatever you say might get surpassed by current events before you get a chance to release the video. But I think it's come to a point where I have to comment on it because even though it's a stupid situation, it's also both serious and dangerous. And also I've received a lot of requests for comments because I am a Danish analyst and many people thought it would be interesting to hear my perspective. So let's talk about it. The first question we need to address is why Trump wants Greenland in the first place. And here, I think it's important that we can keep more than one thought in our mind at the same time, because as I see it, there are three different explanations that all play into this and are somewhat actually contradictory to each other. But nevertheless, they managed to coexist in this current crisis. The first reason is strategic. It's that Trump wants Greenland because it aligns with his strategic vision for what's best for the United States. It's based on clearly defined strategies, such as the recently released National Security Strategy, which emphasizes how the United States needs to dominate the Western Hemisphere and basically remove all foreign powers from North and South America. So, in line with this strategic vision, it's necessary for the United States to get rid of Denmark, which is an overseas European power from the continent of North America. Therefore, it's necessary for the United States to pull Greenland away from Denmark. And since they don't see Greenland as having a powerful enough population base that makes it sustainable as an independent country that can defend itself and be a strong partner of the United States, they need to take control of Greenland so they can keep Russia and China away. Ownership in that sense is then about ensuring that the United States will control this territory and not some overseas European power, such as Denmark. There are two dimensions to this question of control over Greenland. One is about military security. That's what Trump often mentions when he talks about how the United States needs Greenland for his Golden Dome missile defense project. This argument doesn't make all that much sense as long as the United States is allied with Greenland and Denmark in NATO because the United States can already install all the sensors and air defense missiles and what have you on Greenland. All they have to do is ask and they will be allowed to do whatever they want. So the only way this argument about military security makes sense is if Trump is preparing for a future when the United States is no longer going to be allied with Denmark. It therefore looks like they want Greenland because they're preparing for a post-NATO world order. The other reason why control is strategically important is that it gives access to natural resources and rare earths and those things. Trump is always enthusiastic about the prospect of making money and controlling natural resources. And that's also what we see him focusing on right now in Venezuela, for example, how American companies will be making money from Venezuela's oil. It's essentially the same thing with Greenland. He wants control of Greenland because then he can grant access to those natural resources to people and to companies that he believes deserves it. This requires political control of Greenland because it means that he will need to control the whole process from deciding who is given the rights to extract those natural resources to managing the environmental protection regulations and all kinds of things. This way, he won't face obstacles, for example, from the Greenlandic government that might have different ideas about environmental protection and such things. So that is the strategic idea behind this. This part of Donald Trump's desire to control Greenland is rooted in a clear strategy that is larger than Donald Trump himself. It's a vision of a role for the United States as a great power that has support in at least parts of the MAGA movement and has been formalized as officially stated policy. The second explanation for why Trump wants Greenland is more closely tied to the man, Donald Trump. That is, quite frankly, his narcissism. He wants Greenland because it makes him feel good. He even said that recently in an interview with the New York Times when he mentioned that he needs to own Greenland because it's psychologically important to him. These two perspectives are not mutually exclusive. On the one hand, there is strategy. And on the other hand, it's also just because Donald Trump psychologically wants it. These two explanations can coexist. But I think it's important to have a discussion about how Trump's narcissism influences U.S. foreign policy. And we also need a broader discussion about what narcissism is because many people don't know that. We need to have a better idea of how it expresses itself. I'm going to link to a video by Vlad Vexler. I'm going to put it in the video description. He delves more into this question, and I think it's a really good video. But Vlad's essential point is that narcissists tend to group people into two categories. There is one category of people that they idolize and from whom they get narcissistic supply by being seen as part of a group with those people. So, for example, that's how Trump deals with Putin. He idolizes Putin and he gets narcissistic supply from obtaining Putin's approval. And then there is the other group of people that the narcissists consider basically nobodies and the narcissistic supply comes from essentially sadistic behavior towards those people. And the desire to be feared, to be feared by this group of people, and of being seen as strong and dangerous. And this is how Trump views Western European countries. So Trump wants Greenland because he desires it. And he wants Denmark and the Greenlanders to comply because it makes him feel powerful. And I think we should probably expect him also to want to do stupid things like renaming Greenland, for example, so that in the future it will be known as _Donald Trump Land_. I mean, I'm not joking. I honestly think that we should expect him to do things like that with Greenland after taking control. So that's the second explanation. That is Trump's narcissism. The third explanation is incompetence. In demanding Greenland, Trump is asking for something that he can't have. And almost anyone with even the most basic understanding of Danish or Greenlandic or European politics would know that this is not the case. But Donald Trump doesn't know that. And therefore, he has set himself up for inevitable failure. This is a battle he can't win. No amount of threats or bullying will make the Danes or the Greenlanders agree to an American acquisition of Greenland. Right now, he's talking about tariffs. Tariffs will clearly not work. But he could be threatening nuclear weapons against Copenhagen, and it still would not change anything. The answer would still remain the same. So there are many levels in this incompetence regarding this issue. The first is the lack of understanding of how Denmark and Greenland function. Greenland is today not a Danish colony. That was the case a long time ago. But today, Greenland is its own country within the kingdom of Denmark. There are three countries in the Kingdom of Denmark. That's Denmark, the Faroe Islands, and Greenland. It works more or less the same way as the British Commonwealth. When Trump asks Denmark to sell Greenland, it's kind of the same as if he asked the British to sell Australia. Or Canada for that matter. It's absurd because it's not doable. But that's what he's asking. Another level of incompetence is that he does not understand how Europe works. He does not understand that starting a tariff war against the European Union is probably not going to turn out well for the United States. And putting sanctions on individual European countries is going to lead to a collective response from the entirety of the European Union, because that's what the tariff union is about. And expecting the European Union not to do that in this case is essentially the same as asking the European Union to commit suicide. That would be the consequence of Europe not standing together in questions like that. And it's the same with NATO, of course, because forcing Denmark to cede Greenland would mean the end of NATO. It would not only destroy NATO as we know it, but it would also destroy the idea of other NATO countries continuing to work together to protect Europe against Russia after the United States potentially has withdrawn from the alliance. That is the direction things are going. So when Donald Trump expects European countries to put pressure on Denmark to give him Greenland, he is essentially asking them to sacrifice not only NATO, but also the European Union and the future security of their own continent. That's just not going to happen. So Donald Trump has here picked a fight where there is no room for him to achieve what he wants through any kind of compromise or coercion. There are only two possible outcomes from the current crisis. Either Donald Trump gives up and he stops talking about Greenland, or he goes through with a military invasion, because nothing short of a military invasion will get him what he's asking for. And frankly, I don't think a military invasion is possible. Of course, the United States military could go to Greenland, but I don't think it's possible politically for Donald Trump to proceed with it due to the internal pressures that there would be in the United States. We're increasingly seeing both Democrat and Republican politicians who are openly discussing how they don't approve of this idea. And they want to make it clear to Donald Trump that doing so could actually end his presidency. It could lead to impeachment. So starting a war against a NATO ally seems like a red line that he cannot cross. So this is a fight that Donald Trump cannot win. Unless he can convince American politicians to allow him to proceed with a military invasion, he cannot get what he wants. We all might end up losing a lot of money because of this, because we're going to get this tariff war, but that's another issue. It won't get him what he wants. So that's my basic explanation of what the controversy is about. It's essentially fueled by equal doses of strategic thinking about how the MACA movement views America's role in the world, it's Donald Trump's narcissism, and it's just mind-boggling levels of incompetence. And without any of these three factors, we would not be experiencing a conflict over Greenland right now. I want to finish off with a few thoughts on how Europe needs to proceed if we want to break this vicious cycle that we are caught in with Donald Trump. And the key to understanding how to deal with Trump is his narcissism and understanding how he makes this division of people into two groups. There are those he idolizes and those he desires to humiliate. Right now, the Europeans fall in the latter category. And the whole strategy of how to deal with Trump since he became president, again, has been a resounding failure because it's just cemented that view for him. Macron actually said it quite clearly the other day that one of Europe's problems is that other countries don't fear us. And that's why we don't have influence in the world. I think when it comes to Donald Trump, that is true. We need to understand that the things we are trying to achieve by flattering Donald Trump are only possible to achieve if we do the opposite. If we play tough, he will respect us. But if we humiliate ourselves in front of him, then that will motivate him to continue destroying the things that we are trying to protect because he does not want to be associated with being one of us. So Europe faces the choice now how to deal with Donald Trump's pressure. Should we try to avoid escalation and seek to renegotiate a trade agreement where we might accept some unfair tariffs if they're not totally destructive? Or shall we respond in kind? I will say that I think the best approach is to essentially borrow a term that may be familiar to military enthusiasts from discussions about Russian nuclear doctrine, which is that Europe needs to escalate to de-escalate. Europe needs to respond very forcefully to the challenges that Donald Trump is presenting right now, because that's the only way to break this destructive trajectory that we are on and to restore some normalcy. We need to escalate in order for the situation to de-escalate. So I would say that Europe probably needs to do two things. First, it needs to take a very strong stance in the case of Greenland and roll out the big guns in terms of the tariff war. That's one thing. And the other thing is, I think Europe needs to focus on defeating Putin in Ukraine, because Trump idolizes Putin. If Europe can beat Putin, then that is something that could potentially shake up how he views Europe, and it could give him renewed interest in actually working with the Europeans. Okay, I will end it here. That was my take on Greenland. If you found it helpful or informative, then please give it a like. And if you want to support the channel, you can get access to bonus videos by subscribing to my newsletter on www.logicofwar.com. Thank you very much for watching, and I will see you again next time.

NRW-Innenminister Reul hat sich auf einer Lesung in Oerlinghausen offen für ein AfD-Verbotsverfahren gezeigt und geht davon aus, dass es kommen wird.

Listen now on your favorite streaming service. Powered by Songlink/Odesli, an on-demand, customizable smart link service to help you share songs, albums, podcasts and more.

Ein Unternehmer soll in der Pandemie fünf Millionen Masken verkauft haben. Weil er den Gewinn offenbar nicht versteuerte, steht er in Bayern vor Gericht.

Wusstest Du, dass Milliardärsfamilien Erbschaften fast steuerfrei weitergeben können? Schuld sind ungerechte Steuerschlupflöcher, die gestopft werden müssen. Jetzt unterzeichnen ✍️ teilen!

Bandcamp verbannt KI-generierte Musik und verbietet deren Upload auf der Plattform, um die menschliche Kreativität zu fördern.

Rote Karte für Donald Trump!

AfD-Mitglieder sollten verfassungsfeindliche Belege einreichen. Laut Richterin überwiegt Kunstfreiheit – zur Überraschung des Angeklagten.