Greendlexit
Icebergs in Greenland. Source
Ignacio Lasheras Feijoo, 8 minutes
In 1982 the Greenlanders decided to leave the European Union. Today, it is part of the Overseas Countries and Territories associated with the EU. Considering the geopolitical context of the Artic, what does this partnership mean for Brussels?
After the Brexit referendum of 2016, the whole European Union (EU) realized that the process of integration had an effective “out-option”. Journalists from all over the world used endless quantities of ink to write editorials and catchy captions about what nobody expected: Against all the odds, for the first time in history, a country had left the EU. Nonetheless, as the historian K. K. Patel argues, the option of leaving the European project has been present since its conception. The possibility of a re-nationalization of competencies has always hung over the head of states like a Damocles sword. Proof of this is that, unlike what is commonly known, the United Kingdom is not the first state that has left the European project. More than thirty years before the Brexit referendum, and thousands of kilometers away from London, in 1982 the Greenlanders were called to vote on whether they wanted to continue being members of the European Economic Community (EEC). 52% of them decided to leave. This article first explores the kind of relationship that the EU and Greenland have since 1982. Secondly, it analyzes the role of the EU in Artic geopolitics.
Today Greenland is part of the overseas countries and territories (OCT) associated with the EU. Most part of the union’s acquis applies to its territory, and its budget heavily depends on the EU’s funds. Paradoxically, Greenland is currently more integrated than when it decided to leave. This makes me think about the days following the Brexit referendum. Some European leaders advocated for a two-speed Europe, in which each country pursued a different level of integration according to its needs. But what if that model had already been introduced years ago?
The Faroe Islands and Greenland: Two different paths
Denmark currently has two overseas territories: Greenland, and the Faroe Islands. In the last half of the twentieth century, both islands enjoyed different degrees of political autonomy. While the Faroe Islands were granted home rule in 1948, Greenland was considered a county until 1979. The different degrees of political autonomy between both regions marked diverging paths toward European integration.
In 1960, Denmark created together with Norway, the UK, Portugal, Sweden, Switzerland, and Austria the European Free Trade Association (EFTA). EFTA is an international organization that promoted a different trade liberalization path than the EEC. Just one year later, Copenhagen decided to change the course of its European policy by applying for EEC membership. Denmark was aware of the peculiarities of some of its overseas territories. Since both islands’ economies heavily relied on fishing, they were not particularly in favor of joining any free trade association. They did not want third states getting access to their waters. This is the reason why, when Copenhagen gave the Faroe Islands autonomy to decide whether to join the EFTA or the EEC, they joined none of them.
Nonetheless, the case of Greenland was far different from the rest of Denmark’s overseas territories. After the Second World War, Greenland stopped being considered a Danish colony and was incorporated as a county. It did never enjoy the same autonomy as the Faroe Islands. In 1959 the central government unilaterally decided not to include Greenland in the EFTA membership. Ten years later, Copenhagen decided again without the Greenlanders’ consideration to include the island in its application to the EEC. Therefore, when Denmark became a member of the EEC in 1973, together with the United Kingdom, Greenland also did.
While in the whole country, 63,3% of the population supported joining the EEC, in Greenland 70% of the citizens voted against it. Greenlanders did not support that the British fishermen could get access to their waters that are much richer and have more fish. It was not until 1979, that Greenland received the status of autonomous dependent territory from Denmark. This was the kind of arrangement Greenland needed to become independent from the EEC while still being part of Denmark. In February 1982, 52% of the Greenlanders voted in favor of leaving, and it became one of the first territories in abandoning the EEC.
A Geopolitical Game?
In 1982, several European leaders were very concerned about the possibility of Greenland leaving the EEC. K.K. Patel tells that even Margaret Thatcher asked the Danish government if they could do anything to convince the Greenlanders to stay within the EEC. This eager interest in maintaining Greenland within the Union is quite striking if it is considered that it is not the first territory that has ever left it. When the Treaty of Rome was signed in 1957, three out of the six founding fathers of the EU still had colonial possessions. These territories (i.e. Algeria) were included in the Union and eventually left it due to decolonization. Once they were not considered anymore part of the “colonial state” that they used to belong to, they were immediately out of the Union. Thus, one might wonder why there was so much interest in keeping Greenland within the EEC.
It shall be recalled that the geo-strategic position of Greenland has always made it a coveted territory. In 1946, the United States offered more than one hundred million dollars to Copenhagen to buy Greenland. Even four years ago, Donald Trump claimed that he was considering buying it. The reason underlying this interest is that Greenland is in the middle of the fastest route from Washington to Moscow. American presidents have always seen Greenland as an important fortress to protect its territory. Indeed, at the end of the Second World War, Denmark conceded the United States' complete jurisdiction over the island's protection.
Over the last decades, we have seen how geopolitical tensions have increased in the Arctic. Climate change is directly related to the melting of the glaciers, which unluckily is going to create new trade routes. China, Russia, and the US are already engaged in a fight for influence in this area. Additionally, the presence of rare minerals in Greenland, makes it a sanctuary for geologists. Most of these minerals are important for big-tech companies, and therefore it sets it in the spotlight of those superpowers that are looking for more strategic autonomy. Then, the question is, how does this geopolitical competition affect the relationship with the EU?
The current role of the European Union
As aforementioned, Greenland enjoys the status of an oversea country and territory associated with the European Union. Most of the EU’s acquis apply in the territory, it receives funding from the EU. Paradoxically, while the fisheries policy was one of the main reasons why Greenland left the EU, the EU fleet now has access to Greenland’s waters. In 2021, the EU and Greenland signed a sustainable fisheries partnership agreement for six years. Therefore, it is currently more integrated than it used to be when it left the Union.
Even if the EU has moved forward with some initiatives to strengthen the ties with Greenland, it is still very vague. It shall be recalled that the green strategy of the EU heavily relies on rare minerals. Greenland is one of the very few territories associated with the EU that has them. The Commission has undertaken some initiatives to take advantage of this situation, like the “Letter of Intent on Cooperation on raw materials” between the Greenland authorities and the Commission in 2012. Yet there has not been any progress since then. In the meantime, China has sought to undertake several infrastructure projects in Greenland through the Belt and Road Initiative. Even if Copenhagen has always managed to avoid the presence of Beijing in the region, its shadow is still over it.
More than forty years ago, the Greenlanders expressed their willingness to abandon the European Union. Paradoxically, today they are more integrated than they used to be in the seventies. At the same time, it has proved necessary to advance the strategic autonomy of the EU, particularly in green policies. This opens new opportunities for partnership between the both of them, but the EU shall take the lead to take advantage of the geopolitical circumstances.
