Scivillage.com Casual Discussion Science Forum

ZEIHAN ON GEOPOLITICS
https://youtu.be/BA2T1LNok0Y

VIDEO EXCERPTS: I'm going to use this as an opportunity to talk about the geopolitics of climate change. Everyone, including team Trump is now talking about the effect that it's going to have on the system.

The Trump Administration is of the belief that as seaways and minerals become available [due to climate change], the United States should preemptively reach out and grab the relevant territories.

Ergo, the talk about Greenland and Canada. [...But...] when you look at things like the permafrost in Northern Canada, or the ice in Greenland, you have a much more durable climate zone.

The permafrost is a mess in the summer: it's a swamp, it's mushy, it's hard to build things on, and there is only one road [seasonally open] leading from populated Canada to Yellow Knife.

[...] Basically, if they're going to mineral extract, they have to build a runway with things that are air dropped in, and then fly in supplies. ... So meaningful climate change that allows for the exploitation of Northern Canada isn't going to take years or even decades, it's going to be a couple of centuries.

Greenland may be a little bit faster, there you've got an ice sheet that's over a kilometer thick. It will probably be well over a century before technology exists to go after it.

So are there minerals up there, undoubtedly. Are they accessible in a human lifetime with today's technology? Absolutely not.

Okay... second, shipping. The idea is that as the ice retreats on the seas in the Arctic Ocean, you could then open up a direct route from Northeast Asia to Western Europe. But let's be honest about what we're talking about here..

[...] the theory would be that the Chinese are going to build infrastructure along this multi-thousand mile coastline, so they can then open the shipping route. Well, let’s talk timing. If you want to do that, you have to wait for the Arctic to be ice free in the winter.

That’s not ten years. That’s not 20 years. It's 60 or 70 years. Most likely because the Eastern navigation will be gone every single time the moving sea ice comes through...

[...] It’s all Russian territory that is on that sea bridge. And I don’t know if you knew this, but building roads in Russian Siberia is just as difficult as building them in Canadian tundra....

What's going on with climate change? ... https://youtu.be/BA2T1LNok0Y

President Trump is trying to motivate both Canada and much smaller Denmark (which controls Greenland) to do more to assert their sovereignty in the high arctic and to defend and develop those territories.

The context is that Russia's longest coastline is along the Arctic Ocean and that Russia senses a power vacuum up there.

Meanwhile, Russia realizes that they will be incapable of challenging the US Navy's surface fleet for the foreseeable future. (It's China that's building up to try to do that.) So the Russians' future plans for their own navy is to lean heavily on nuclear submarines that can move underneath the polar ice and then use them to achieve dominance in the high arctic, turning the Arctic Ocean into a Russian lake.

And that brings the Russians right up to the neglected Canadian and Greenland arctic coasts.

Trump already seems to be getting the desired response from Denmark, which has announced a multibillion dollar effort to build up Danish military presence in Greenland. Probably some of the left-wingers in the Danish parliament see that as spitting in Trump's eye and as an effort to keep the Americans out. But Trump doesn't mind because they are doing precisely what he wants them to do.

Canada's response will probably have to wait until after their election late in the year.

(Feb 2, 2025 01:07 AM)Yazata Wrote: [ -> ]Canada's response will probably have to wait until after their election late in the year.

Then we just invite the Russians over for a game of hockey, some beers and vodka. If Trump treats us like crap then might as well find out what it’s like having the bear as a friend. At least we can make it look like it’s happening.

(Feb 2, 2025 02:41 AM)Zinjanthropos Wrote: [ -> ]

(Feb 2, 2025 01:07 AM)Yazata Wrote: [ -> ]Canada's response will probably have to wait until after their election late in the year.

Then we just invite the Russians over for a game of hockey, some beers and vodka. If Trump treats us like crap then might as well find out what it’s like having the bear as a friend. At least we can make it look like it’s happening.

Canada could always try to sweet talk some of those North US states into becoming new Territories of Canada. It would be a pretty crap legacy for Trump if some states defect.

Can't happen without the approval of over 60% of the states.

I'd bet that it's easier for Canadian provinces to secede.

(Feb 2, 2025 03:48 AM)stryder Wrote: [ -> ]

(Feb 2, 2025 02:41 AM)Zinjanthropos Wrote: [ -> ]

(Feb 2, 2025 01:07 AM)Yazata Wrote: [ -> ]Canada's response will probably have to wait until after their election late in the year.

Then we just invite the Russians over for a game of hockey, some beers and vodka. If Trump treats us like crap then might as well find out what it’s like having the bear as a friend. At least we can make it look like it’s happening.

Canada could always try to sweet talk some of those North US states into becoming new Territories of Canada. It would be a pretty crap legacy for Trump if some states defect.

Russia kind of close to Alaska, no? Heard Russkie planes have been seen buzzing around.

Despite liking Trump, I think he missed the boat on this one. Probably become an election issue here…who can hit the States the hardest might become a reason for getting elected. But I really think Trump is just following up on some election promises, if only for a few days, just to say he did what he said he would. Unfortunately it puts allies at loggerheads. We’ll play along. Accusing us of being lax at the border when the Mexicans just walk in US back door is pretty funny.

If anyone thinks Canada can "hit the States [hard]," they're fooling themselves. If we had the Keystone pipeline, you'd have a little leverage, but nowhere near as much of an effect as the US has on Canada.