Speaker
Description
The study analyzes the geopolitical crisis surrounding Greenland as a fundamental test of the sustainability of the international legal order and the institutional capacity of NATO and the EU. The focus is on the conceptual clash between the outdated model of “territory purchase” and the modern liberal legalism affirming the right to self-determination of the Greenlandic people. The methodology includes a legal and normative analysis of the 2009 Act on Greenland Self-Government, a comparative study of the evolution of the Monroe Doctrine, and an analysis of cases of geoeconomic coercion in the Arctic. The results of the study identify critical risks arising from the increased Russian-Chinese strategic cooperation and the vulnerability of critical infrastructure to foreign investment. The main conclusions reject the treatment of territory as a commodity and emphasize that sovereignty is inextricably linked to the will of the population in Nuuk. The article recommends, on the one hand, institutionalizing NATO's role by strengthening its European pillar and eliminating the “alliance dilemma” by conducting a specialized Arctic mission, and on the other hand, activating the EU's defense mechanisms against economic coercion and strictly adhering to the democratic procedures for changing the status, as set out in the 2009 Act. The study establishes Greenland as an active security entity, whose defense is a litmus test for the ability of Western allies to uphold the principle of sovereign equality and to implement an innovative approach in a “zero to one” perspective.