Greenlanders embrace Danish PM after JD Vance's disastrous visit
The people of Greenland have warmly welcomed the Danish prime minister after pointedly rebuffing US vice-president JD Vance and Usha Vance, the second lady, during their visit last week.
Mette Frederiksen was cheered upon her arrival in the Danish overseas territory for a three-day visit that has been characterised as a show of solidarity in the face of repeated US take-over threats.
One resident shouting from a window said: 'Hey Mette! Thanks for being here,' according to Danish public broadcaster DR. Footage of the prime minister descending the steps of her aeroplane shows two people embracing her.
The scenes marked a stark contrast from the arrival of Mr Vance and his wife at a US airbase on the island on 24 March, when no official representatives from Greenland or Denmark came to greet them.
'It is clear that with the pressure put on Greenland by the Americans, in terms of sovereignty, borders and the future, we need to stay united,' Ms Frederiksen said after arriving.
Her visit is timed to reassure the island's 57,000 residents, the vast majority of whom want to become independent from Denmark but do not wish to become part of the United States, polls show.
Donald Trump has repeatedly said the US should take over Greenland for security reasons and has not ruled out the possibility of using military force to do so, causing relations with Denmark to sour.
In a pointed message to Mr Trump, Mette Frederiksen said 'you cannot annex another country.'
Holy Cow!
Denmark's Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen just sent a very stern, serious and condemning message to Donald Trump about his attempts to annex Greenland!
"When you ask our businesses to invest into the US. They do. When you ask us to spend more on defense. We do. And… pic.twitter.com/YkIVqYh8oy
— Ed Krassenstein (@EdKrassen) April 3, 2025
The vice president and his wife were widely mocked when the second lady's plans for a solo visit to the island were jettisoned after locals refused to turn-out to greet her.
Mrs Vance had originally been slated to visit the territory with one of her sons to watch the Avannaata Qimussersu dog-sled race in Sisimiut.
However, the programme was reorganised amid diplomatic backlash, with Mr Vance announcing he would join his wife at the last minute.
Reports later emerged that US representatives had spent a week canvassing door-to-door in Nuuk ahead of the diplomatic sojourn to sound out if residents would welcome a visit from Mrs Vance.
The US advances were shot down by Greenlandic residents, according to TV 2 reporter Jesper Steinmetz, who said the 'Americans' charm offensive mission has failed'.
During the visit, which lasted only a matter of hours, Mr Vance addressed US troops at a Pituffik military base, where he criticised Denmark for not having 'done a good job by the people of Greenland' by 'underinvesting' in security.
Mr Vance declared that the US could no longer 'bury our head in the snow' and ignore China's attempts to establish itself in the semi-autonomous territory.
He also explicitly urged Greenlanders to vote for independence from Denmark, urging its citizens to join the US's 'security umbrella' in comments that caused outrage in Copenhagen.
Lars Lokke Rasmussen, Greenland's foreign minister, responded in a post on social media that 'we are open to criticisms, but let me be completely honest, we do not appreciate the tone in which it's being delivered'.
Meeting on the sidelines of a Nato summit in Brussels on Thursday, Marco Rubio, the US state secretary, reassured Mr Rasmussen of the 'strong' ties between the countries.
According to The Washington Post, the White House is currently estimating the cost for the US federal government to control Greenland, and the potential revenues it could derive from exploiting its largely untapped natural resources.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New Statesman
2 hours ago
- New Statesman
Laughing at the populist right is not a political strategy
Photo by ROBERTO SCHMIDT/AFP via Getty Images Across north London, in the citadels of the liberal elite, it has been hard to hear yourself think. The roars, whoops and whistles of merry laughter; the stamping of feet on floorboards; the wheezing, the rasping coughs and the slapping of thighs… yes, Donald and Elon, not to mention Nigel and Zia, have brought a lot of innocent cheer. This is not simply about great egos falling out: a voyeuristic thrill as the world's most powerful man and the world's richest man traded insults. It also poses a more important question about whether the revolutionary surge by the populist right, which began in America, is starting to collapse, weighed down by contradictions. After all, in taking aim at President Trump's 'big beautiful bill' in the cause of fiscal sanity, Musk put his finger on the glaring ideological fissure inside today's new right – the gap between traditional fiscal conservatives who believe growth comes from low taxes balanced by tightly controlled government spending; and the performative hucksters, happy to offer whatever the voter base wants, affordable or not. I'm well aware that this flatters Elon Musk, who has been happy to have his company suck greedily at the teat of federal spending, and who only seems to have seen the light when he realised how much the withdrawal of electric vehicle subsidies in the bill would have hit Tesla. Further, Musk's threats to cancel the Dragon rocket programme on which the International Space Station depends – threats he then reversed – and his accusation about Trump's involvement with paedophile Jeffrey Epstein – an accusation he then deleted – suggests a man on the edge. Some have pointed to Musk's disclosures about his ketamine use. Trump simply taunted him by saying he is 'losing his mind'. Either way, Musk doesn't look or sound much like a traditional Republican. The tech-titan lobby he speaks for is desperate for lavish US government support and subsidy – and, indeed, in its fight with Chinese rivals, has a strong case for long-term federal backing. If Musk is genuinely gone for good from Trumpland, and it's hard to see a way back, Jeff Bezos and Sam Altman will have their thumbs competing for the West Wing doorbell soon. Meanwhile, Musk's Doge, strongly backed in Silicon Valley, so far seems like a damp squib – the tree has defeated the chainsaw. But let's try to put all that to one side. There is still a fundamental difference between the pork-barrel, 'spend big, promise bigger' instincts of Trump himself, using borrowed money to fling tax cuts to his hugely rich friends, and the genuine anxiety of Elon Musk about a swollen federal budget and debt. Subscribe to The New Statesman today from only £8.99 per month Subscribe Does this divide expose the very nature of the Maga movement? It's powered by poorer, excluded Americans who may have deep hatred of 'woke' culture, but who are interested in their own economic position – blue-collar Americans who want factories brought back home, but also want to keep their benefits, and have a deep suspicion of the political elite. The Trump bill, slashing taxes for the richest while cutting Medicare and other programmes for the poorest, shows whose side he is on; if Musk's campaign to stop the bill by encouraging a platoon of rebel Republicans to block it in the Senate were to succeed, he would be doing a favour not just to the increasingly worried bond markets but also to the Maga base. Let's turn nearer to home, where the gone, gone-back-again Zia Yusuf, the pinging Reform UK chairman who had floated a British version of Doge, offers a parallel. Reform faces two substantial policy challenges. One is 'respectability' – how far to go in an anti-migrant, race-inflected direction in order to energise its coalition? The second is economic. Like Maga, Reform has a blue-collar, working-class base and is offering not just huge tax cuts of nearly £90bn a year but also spending increases of £50bn a year on things those voters want more of, such as the NHS. It says it can pay for this with cuts of £150bn a year. The Institute for Fiscal Studies says the numbers don't add up: 'Spending reductions would save less than stated, and the tax cuts would cost more than stated, by a margin of tens of billions of pounds per year.' This suggests, as with the Trump bill, that poorer Farage supporters would find their benefits under threat, while middle-class ones wouldn't get the tax cuts they wanted. Unsurprisingly, and after seeing off Reform in the Hamilton Scottish parliamentary by-election, Keir Starmer has jumped on this, comparing the Farage package to Liz Truss and accusing him of making the same bet – 'that you can spend tens of billions on tax cuts without a proper way of paying for it'. And so we come to this week and the Spending Review. Fundamentally, the fight ahead is about credibility and timing. Populists insist there are quick, almost painless short-term fixes to the long problem of low productivity and growth. They suggest you can slash taxes and simultaneously improve working-class living standards. Reeves' version of social democracy has an answer to this – the big investments announced this week in everything from nuclear power to transport connections. Invest, long-term and patiently, and the growth will return. It's not a quick fix. Voters must wait. Andy Haldane, the Bank of England's former chief economist, urges Labour to have an understandable 'people strategy' and more power for the regions and nations to give voters hope while the investment arrives. Because we are not a patient lot, and that is what Reform preys on. Haldane told the Guardian: 'Nigel Farage is as close to what the country has to a tribune for the working classes. I don't think there's any politician that comes even remotely close to speaking to, and for, blue-collar, working-class Britain. I think that is just a statement of fact…' Well, if so, isn't it an extraordinary one? Farage, an ex-City trader from the suburban south, is more of a tribune than Rayner, Phillipson, Streeting or Reed, who grew up in council housing and on benefits? Able to speak to working people in a way that the government, 92 per cent of whose ministers attended comprehensive schools, can't? This points to a familiar but catastrophic problem – the strange inability of this Labour government to communicate its cause vividly. By investing wisely, it can bring growth and therefore better times, but meanwhile it needs the fire of a Kinnock, the moral weight of a Brown, the birds-from-trees persuasiveness of a Blair. Yet too often, all we hear are wooden tongues. The lessons of the past fortnight are twofold. First, the right-wing populist insurgency, both in America and here, is fragile, not omnipotent. As the Musk episode reminds us, there is a difference between radical protest and traditional conservative thinking, particularly on the role of the state. Any coalition big enough to overwhelm social democracy can come apart quickly when personalities go to war. Although they sometimes run in parallel, American politics and British politics, Brobdingnag and Lilliput, remain different in structure, electoral make-up and rhythm. One must be cautious about those equal signs: the quick peace deal between Yusuf and Farage showed a sense lacking in Washington. Still, the mocking liberal laughter wasn't all ridiculous. But the second lesson is that, even with a plausible growth strategy, social democracy needs brilliant storytellers to keep a tired and sceptical electorate onside. This is a long fight. Starmer and Reeves are in it for years to come. But they have to become far better communicators. Nigel Farage, after all, is a man used to having the last, loud laugh. [See more: Reform needs Zia Yusuf] Related
NBC News
12 hours ago
- NBC News
Trump warns that military parade protesters will face 'very heavy force'
WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump warned Tuesday that anyone who protests at the U.S. military parade here on Saturday will be met with "very heavy force." Trump told reporters in the Oval Office that they're going to be "celebrating big on Saturday," referring to the parade that will wind its way through downtown Washington, D.C. "If there's any protester that wants to come out, they will be met with very big force," Trump said. "I haven't even heard about a protest, but you know, this is people that hate our country, but they will be met with very heavy force." The White House didn't immediately respond to a request for comment. The president also addressed the protests of the administration's immigration raids in Los Angeles."These are paid insurrectionists," he said about the demonstrators. The military parade Saturday will mark the 250th anniversary of the U.S. Army and is expected to feature tanks and hundreds of other military vehicles and aircraft. It's estimated to cost about $45 million, including as much as $16 million to repair D.C. streets afterward, U.S. military officials said last month. Saturday is also Trump's 79th birthday. "We're going to have a fantastic June 14 parade, Flag Day. It's going to be an amazing day. We have tanks, we have planes, we have all sorts of things. And I think it's going to be great. We're going to celebrate our country for a change," Trump said Tuesday. Trump said that other countries celebrate the end of World War II and that the U.S. was the only country that did not. "And we're the one that won the war," said Trump, who added that if it weren't for the U.S., Americans would be speaking German or Japanese. "We won the war, and we're the only country that didn't celebrate it, and we're going to be celebrating big on Saturday," he said. Officials are expecting hundreds of thousands of attendees, Matt McCool, the U.S. Secret Service agent in charge of the Washington field office, said Monday. McCool said they plan to deploy "thousands of agents, officers and specialists from across the country." People attending the parade or a related festival will be required to go through checkpoints with magnetometers. Asked about any changes to security planning in light of the L.A. protests, McCool said, "We plan for those things ahead of time' 'We were paying attention, obviously, to what is happening there, and we'll be ready for that if it were to occur here,' he said, though he added, 'We have no intelligence of that happening here, but if it does, we have the resources to handle it." U.S. Park Police had several protest permits pending on Monday, but officials 'don't have any significant concerns," said McCool, who added that they're tracking 'about nine First Amendment activity demonstrations.' The anti-Trump group No Kings is expecting more than 1,800 rallies nationwide Saturday that organizers said were planned as "a peaceful stand against authoritarian overreach and the gross abuse of power this Administration has shown." With Trump's decision to deploy the National Guard and U.S. Marines to respond to the L.A. demonstrations, the group said in a statement: "This military escalation only confirms what we've known: this government wants to rule by force, not serve the people. From major cities to small towns, we'll rise together and say: we reject political violence. We reject fear as governance. We reject the myth that only some deserve freedom."
NBC News
13 hours ago
- NBC News
Trump faces criticism of his broad mass deportation push from two different angles
The sister of a woman allegedly murdered by six noncitizens said President Donald Trump's administration is targeting the wrong people for deportation and is not doing enough to get the worst of the worst off U.S. streets, even as authorities embark on a massive deportation effort. Tiffany Thompson, whose sister Larisha Sharrell Thompson was shot and killed in South Carolina last month, said she was angered that while deportations have played a central role in Trump's administration, more hadn't been done to target those who were charged in the killing — particularly the alleged ringleader, who faced a previous charge before her sister was killed. 'It's frustrating that they're illegal and they committed this crime. They should have been deported, maybe this wouldn't have happened,' Thompson told NBC News in an interview. She added: 'I don't know where Trump is right now.' The notion that a family member of someone allegedly killed by an undocumented immigrant would call Trump to action over his signature issue comes amid broader questions about how the president is executing his mass deportation policy. Though from a different point of view, Tiffany Thompson's anger mirrors the angst rippling through Los Angeles over Trump's deportation efforts there, culminating in protests and some violent clashes and driven by the belief that the administration is indiscriminately removing noncitizens instead of targeting removal of criminals, in an attempt to laud a high number of arrests. Polling shows immigration remains Trump's strongest issue, though the most recent CBS News/YouGov poll conducted last week illustrated a gap: A 55% majority said they like the goals of Trump's deportation program, while 44% said they like how 'he is going about it.' Americans narrowly said they believe Trump is prioritizing dangerous criminals (53%) versus prioritizing nondangerous people (47%) for deportation. And to the extent there is sharp division over Trump's immigration policy, it's not over efforts to deport convicted criminals. More than 80% of Americans support deporting those who have committed violent crimes, according to the Pew Research Center data from late February and early March. 'What this administration is doing is going after low-hanging fruit: collateral arrests, stripping protections,' said Beatriz Lopez, co-executive director of Immigration Hub, a national immigration policy group. Lopez derided Trump administration tactics, including stripping Temporary Protected Status from Venezuelans and agents making arrests outside immigration courthouse hearings. 'They are creating the chaos,' she added. 'They aren't going after violent criminals. They are creating undocumented people.' Trump's border czar, Tom Homan, pushed back on that characterization on MSNBC's 'Morning Joe' on Monday, saying that the enforcement actions in Los Angeles last week stemmed from a criminal investigation targeting specific individuals as part of a larger alleged conspiracy. They were not, Homan said, a random immigration raid. 'I said from day one, Jan. 20, we will prioritize public safety threats and national security threats. However, we will enforce law, particularly — I may prioritize my family life over my work, doesn't mean I ignore my work,' Homan said. 'We're going to enforce immigration law. We've been honest about that from day one, especially in sanctuary cities. When we can't get the bad guy in the safety and security of a jail, they release them to the street. Well, we got to go to the street and find them.' Data show that violent crimes committed by immigrants are rare when compared to the general population. 'We often will hear about a very high-profile event, and not to reduce the tragedy of it — obviously, a crime is still a crime, and it's incredibly painful when you know when people are affected by those sorts of things — but looking at numbers and statistically speaking, it's not as though a higher presence of immigrants creates a higher presence of crime,' said Colleen Putzel-Kavanaugh, associate policy analyst with the Migration Policy Institute, an immigration policy think tank. 'That's been pretty proven through various studies over the years.' But as the Trump administration has pointed to arrestees as 'rapists' and 'killers,' competing narratives have stacked up with examples like a child suffering from cancer ordered to self-deport, university students targeted for removal and advocacy groups sounding alarms over violations of human rights and due process. Some Trump supporters have spoken out about the impact of a dragnet detaining those here legally. An Argentinian couple from North Carolina, who said they had backed Trump, were apoplectic after their 31-year-old son, a green-card holder in the country since he was a toddler, was arrested and detained in Georgia. 'He didn't say he was going to do this, that he was going to go after people who have been here for a long time,' the mother, Debora Rey, said of Trump in an interview with the Atlanta Journal Constitution. 'He said he was going to go after all the criminals who came illegally … We feel betrayed, tricked.' At the same time, noncitizens charged with violent crimes are still making headlines. Under President Joe Biden, Trump attacked such crimes as evidence of a broken system that required his election to fix. Now, he and Republicans hold up those incidents — including the recent attack in Boulder, Colorado — as evidence that deportations should be more widespread. Authorities announced they elevated their deportation efforts, and lauded a record-breaking day of arrests last week. 'President Trump is working at record speed to clean up Joe Biden's Open Border Disaster that let countless unvetted illegal aliens pour into the United States and threaten the safety of American citizens,' White House spokesperson Abigail Jackson said in a written statement. 'The President has closed the border and now he's deporting illegal aliens, especially violent criminals. The recent attack in Boulder just underscores why the President's work is so important. 'We're grateful the media is now admitting that illegal aliens pose a risk to the safety of the American people and look forward to the stories about why Joe Biden let so many violent criminals into the country in the first place,' Jackson continued. The Larisha Thompson case In the Larisha Thompson case, six individuals who do not have legal status, according to the Department of Homeland Security, were charged. That includes 21-year-old Asael Aminadas Torres-Chirinos, who faces three firearms charges and, according to DHS, had previously been arrested on a domestic violence allegation. Lancaster County lawyer Doug Barfield said Chirinos' 2022 charge was still pending. He added that immigration authorities had placed detainers on all six of the individuals, which would prevent them from going free even if they posted bond. Tiffany Thompson said she 'wished they would have seen that,' referencing Chirinos' previous arrest and the fact that he was still in the country. She didn't specifically cast blame on any administration but remained angry that the suspects — including teens who were 13, 14 and 15 years old — were attempting to be released on bond. 'Would I like for Trump to get ahead of this? Yes,' she added. The pace of deportations has bothered the White House, and NBC News reported top Trump aide Stephen Miller berated and threatened to fire senior Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials in May if they did not begin detaining 3,000 migrants a day. Miller also threatened to fire leaders of field offices posting the bottom 10% of arrest numbers monthly, NBC News reported. Yet, that's exactly the tactic that immigration experts say will do little to protect against national security. 'There's really no incentive for ICE to spend a bunch of resources investigating and tracking down people in the field. It's about convenience primarily, and public safety is a distant second,' said David Bier, director of immigration studies at the Cato Institute, a libertarian-aligned public policy think tank. 'The Laken Riley Act specifically says you should be prioritizing resources to go after people who have been arrested on violent or property offenses. So they supported that bill,' Bier said, referencing the law Trump signed in January, which requires Immigration and Customs Enforcement to detain undocumented immigrants who are arrested or face charges, or who have been convicted of 'burglary, theft, larceny, or shoplifting.' After signing the law, Trump said, 'That's why I'm here instead of somebody else. Actually, it's the biggest reason.' Bier said the argument after signing the law was, 'They said: 'This is going to prevent more Laken Rileys.' And then they have done nothing to implement it.' The administration and allies reject that assertion, saying they are arresting criminal noncitizens and are moving as quickly as possible to reverse the impacts of lax border policies under Biden. In March, DHS touted its success in deporting convicted criminals and those who had pending criminal charges. 'He is dealing with what Biden and Kamala Harris facilitated ... He keeps going as fast as he can, trying to fix a million different issues,' said Nicole Kiprilov, the executive director of The American Border Story, a group that elevates 'the human stories of American citizens impacted by the border crisis.' 'These people now who are committing crimes under the Trump administration are people who were brought in by Biden,' Kiprilov said. 'They were not brought in by Trump.' Kiprilov noted that Trump has turned off the flow of illegal immigration by shutting down the southern border. In a written statement, DHS Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin said: 'Under Secretary Noem, we are delivering on President Trump's and the American people's mandate to arrest and deport criminal illegal aliens to make America safe. In the first 100 days, 75% of ICE arrests were criminal illegal aliens with convictions or pending charges. The shocking story here is that instead of deporting many heinous criminals, the Biden Administration chose to RELEASE these known public safety threats into our communities instead of deporting them.' Currently, 56% of those in ICE detention have either been convicted of a crime or have pending criminal charges, according to ICE data. The remainder do not have criminal histories.
