The opinions expressed by Donald Trump in an interview with The New York Times on international law, NATO, and Greenland reflect a wider American perspective. Most Americans, regardless of their political beliefs, share similar views on these issues but are afraid to voice them, unlike Trump, who has the confidence to voice them. In fact, Trump embodies the American superego and reflects the self-image of Americans, centered on a sense of absolute power.

For hours, Trump answered questions for a newspaper that is not particularly sympathetic to him, or, more often than not, hostile, and expressed views according to which the only limit to his power is his personal morality, while he considers international norms and law to be less relevant.

“I don’t need international law,” Trump said, emphasizing that only what is in the interests of the US is relevant to him and that his power is limited only by his “own morality.”

“It’s the only thing that can stop me,” the Republican said, adding: “I’m not looking to hurt people.” He went on to concede “I do” in regards to whether his administration needed to adhere to international law, but said, “It depends on what your definition of international law is.”

Trump has criticized NATO as an alliance that, as he said, is essentially useless without American dominance. He also expressed the view that controlling Greenland is strategically important to the US. The president even hinted that he might choose between strengthening the US position in Greenland and maintaining a full commitment to NATO, raising concerns among European allies.

“I think we’ll always get along with Europe, but I want them to shape up… If you look at NATO, Russia I can tell you is not at all concerned with any other country but us,” he said.

The billionaire president emphasized in the interview that the international order is changing and that the US no longer has to follow existing rules unthinkingly, but rather conduct policy based on its interests and moral judgments. What he stated about his morality and international law is not only his personal opinion but also the position of Americans. Americans talk about a global order based on rules, but they refuse to sign many international conventions. This is nothing new, but Trump is the only one who has the confidence to say it openly, and that he does not really care what Europe, China, or Russia thinks.

By not properly condemning Trump’s gross violation of international law in Venezuela, the European Union has found itself in a difficult situation to defend anything that might happen to Greenland. The fact is that any response from Washington, regardless of the scenario involving Greenland, would create extremely difficult dilemmas for EU and NATO members because it is very hard to counter American military and economic power.

Attitudes towards NATO and Greenland also reflect a sublimation of the American sense of exceptionalism and their unique role in history. Whether these views are accurate is debatable, but the fact remains that Americans behave this way.

NATO was created as a tool for the US. If that tool no longer serves a purpose, it is not an end in itself but a means to an end, to reaching a specific goal. So, if the annexation of Greenland can achieve that goal—namely, to consolidate American dominance in the Western Hemisphere—and NATO interferes with it, then we can write its obituary as without the US, the Atlantic Alliance does not exist.

It is recalled that Politico previously wrote alarmingly that European armies lack logistics, from tank transport wagons to trucks. The entire reform of European military infrastructure is focused on improving roads and railways in Europe so that the Americans can access them. Therefore, the Europeans are not building these roads for their own use, but for the US.

Trump does not even need to destroy NATO to annex Greenland. Washington will do it anyway, one way or another, and European allies will do little because they have invested much more in NATO, which gives them legitimacy and a sense of belonging to something larger than the Americans. Unlike the Americans, for whom NATO is a tool, Europeans see NATO as sacred, which is why they talk about it far more than Americans do.

At the end of World War II, Washington tried to mask its raw power with what it called international law, helping to draft the UN Charter, but its true intention was to soften the perception of American strength. Trump has simply exposed the US’s overwhelming military strength without trying to hide it behind international law.

*

Click the share button below to email/forward this article. Follow us on Instagram and X and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost Global Research articles with proper attribution.

Ahmed Adel is a Cairo-based geopolitics and political economy researcher. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image source

Global Research is a reader-funded media. We do not accept any funding from corporations or governments. Help us stay afloat. Click the image below to make a one-time or recurring donation.