格陵兰岛坚称“不做美国人”

Core Viewpoint - Greenland's political leaders have united in a strong statement rejecting the idea of becoming part of the United States, emphasizing that the future of Greenland should be determined by its people and calling for an end to perceived American disrespect [1][3]. Group 1: Greenland's Political Stance - All five political party leaders in Greenland issued a joint statement asserting their desire not to become part of the United States, emphasizing their identity as Greenlanders [3]. - The statement highlights that Greenland belongs to its people and that they will unite to defend their rights for future generations [3]. - Greenlandic citizens express strong opposition to becoming American, fearing a return to colonialism and the deterioration of trust between Denmark and Greenland due to U.S. interference [3]. Group 2: U.S. Pressure and Intentions - President Trump has reiterated his determination to acquire Greenland, stating that the U.S. must own the territory and suggesting that if a simple agreement cannot be reached, more difficult methods may be employed [6]. - Reports indicate that the White House is discussing various acquisition strategies, including offering one-time payments to Greenlandic citizens, with amounts ranging from $10,000 to $100,000 per person [6]. - There are claims that Trump has requested plans for a potential invasion of Greenland, although military leaders oppose this due to its illegality and lack of congressional support [7]. Group 3: European Response - Europe has initiated a dual diplomatic offensive, lobbying Washington while also considering military deployments to Greenland to address U.S. security concerns in the Arctic [9][10]. - European nations, including Germany, are proposing the establishment of a NATO joint task force to monitor and protect Arctic security interests in response to U.S. threats regarding Greenland [10]. - Denmark is pursuing a two-pronged strategy, publicly urging Trump to cease his aggressive stance while simultaneously seeking diplomatic solutions [9]. Group 4: Broader Implications - The situation has raised concerns about the implications of U.S. imperialism and the challenges faced by European nations reliant on NATO for security, as they grapple with the choice of resistance or submission to U.S. pressures [11].