Today, Greenland's parliament Inatsisartut began its consideration of the security agreement with the USA. Despite broad support, uncertainty remained about several elements.

Greenland's parliament Inatsisartut is sending the USA agreement on to a second reading. (Photo: © Christian Klindt Sølbeck, Ritzau Scanpix)

By Cecilie Kallestrup - Nuuk ([email protected]), 45 minutes ago

- I have been looking forward to presenting the agreement.

That was how Foreign Minister Múte B. Egede opened from the rostrum in Inatsisartut, beneath the two large polar bear figures and sealskin lamps.

The press, including a single American camera crew, was shown to their seats. From the front of the chamber, Government Leader Jens-Frederik Nielsen smiled back toward the row of officials who had been conducting the negotiations on Greenland's behalf for months.

Read also: Mininnguaq Kleist negotiated with the USA for Greenland: 'We were ready to walk out' (https://www.dr.dk/nyheder/indland/groenland/mininnuaq-kleist-forhandlede-med-usa-groenland-vi-var-klar-til-rejse-os)

Today, Greenland's parliament has for the first time taken a position on the defense agreement between Greenland, the USA and Denmark, which until now has only been discussed behind closed doors in Washington – over 3,000 kilometers from Nuuk.

No parties are expected to vote against it. Nevertheless, there were three points in particular that sparked debate during today's first reading.

Greenland's Government Leader, Jens-Frederik Nielsen, Denmark's Prime Minister, Mette Frederiksen, and the USA's President, Donald Trump, during the signing ceremony at the UN building in New York. (Photo: © Mads Claus Rasmussen, Ritzau Scanpix)

Three names in permanent marker have been put on the agreement. So can a single comma be changed now that the agreement is to be approved by parliament?

That question came up during the debate, and several politicians from the two opposition parties Naleraq and Siumut criticized that the agreement has been made far from the population whose future it concerns.

- We support the agreement, but we criticize the way it came about. The two things must be kept separate, said Siumut's leader Erik Jensen.

- From Naleraq's side, we had hoped there would be a far greater information effort, said the party's leader, Pele Broberg.

They are well aware that it is unlikely that the agreement can be changed now. Instead, Erik Jensen demanded that the government be somewhat more generous with information to the public from now on.

- We expect Naalakkersuisut to hold public meetings along the Greenlandic coast to explain to people what exactly is in the agreement, he said.

In this photo taken by American photographer Ken Bower in 2015, rust can be seen coloring the water red at the abandoned base Bluie East 2. (Photo: © Ken Bower, Ken Bower)

A recurring theme was who actually has the responsibility and should pay the environmental bill for the military activities the USA wants in Greenland.

The agreement states that all parties commit to protecting Greenland's nature. But it refers to two earlier agreements in the area.

- I think that's the emperor's new clothes, said Naleraq's Pele Broberg.

He is referring to an agreement Greenland and Denmark made in 2018 on cleanup at 17 former American bases – a task that has become heavily delayed.

- We are trying to signal that the new agreement is not in order, because Denmark has not been able to fulfill the old agreement. There is still cleanup to be done, said Pele Broberg.

But Foreign Minister Múte B. Egede insisted that the agreement takes environmental considerations into account.

- It includes legally binding frameworks for the future protection of Greenland's environment in new defense areas.

Several politicians in today's debate believed that the security of having an agreement outweighs the uncertainty of constant American advances. The AI-generated image here has been posted several times on social media by the American president.

Recent years have shown that Greenland has great geographical value. Therefore, the opposition party Naleraq believes that the Greenlandic government has underplayed its hand.

- When we read the agreement, we see that Greenland gets zero kroner, said leader Pele Broberg.

In his view, the Danes get more out of the agreement, because Denmark can have defense spending in Greenland count toward the amount Denmark must already contribute as a NATO member.

The argument met opposition in the chamber from Justus Hansen, who is elected for Demokraatit in the East Greenlandic town of Tasiilaq.

- You only want to talk about money, money, money. This is an agreement we can be proud of and feel secure about. It's not only about money.

He reminded the chamber of the AI-generated photo the American president has posted several times on his social media, depicting Trump looking down over Tasiilaq itself.

- There are many who moved away because they felt unsafe. That sense of security is returning, said Justus Hansen.

Foreign Minister Múte B. Egede rejected that the government has wanted to accept money.

- When you receive a sum of money, there is always something else you must sacrifice for it. The most important thing has been that we are not a commodity. We will never be able to be bought, and we have said that from the start, he said.

A date has not yet been set for the second reading and final vote on the agreement.

Warning: This article was translated by a Large Language Model, in case of doubt, you can always visit the original source.