(VIDEO IS INTERVIEW WITH CNN’S KAITLIN COLLINS)
Republican Congressman Mike Lawler, whose New York 17th Congressional District covers part of Westchester as well as part of Dutchess and all of Rockland and Putnam, is one of 14 co-sponsors as of Jan. 20 of a bill introduced in the House of Representatives that would authorize President Trump to enter into negotiations with Denmark to reach a deal for the U.S. to take over Greenland from Denmark.
The bill backdates its approval for Trump to try to take over Greenland to a year ago when Trump took office to begin his second term. Trump has been loudly jawboning about a U.S. takeover of various territories, including Greenland, since his return to the White House.
On Jan. 20, Trump said there was”no going back” on his intent to take over Greenland and refused to rule out military force. Trump also posted on social media images generated by artificial intelligence showing him planting a U.S. flag on Greenland and sitting with a map showing Greenland and Canada both covered in U.S. flag stars and stripes.
The proposed legislation requires that within five days of reaching a takeover agreement on Greenland all materials related to the agreement have to be sent to Congress, which then is given 60 days to review them and accept or reject the agreement. If Congress does not reject an agreement within the time period then it automatically takes effect.
The bill HR 361 has been named the “Make Greenland Great Again Act.” All of the co-sponsors are Republicans. The bill was referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs of which Lawler is a member.
Another member of the House Committee on Foreign Affairs, Democratic Congressman George Latimer, whose New York 16th Congressional District includes parts of Westchester and the Bronx, a few days ago took a very different stand on Greenland, saying the U.S. has no business trying to take it over. He pointed out that the U.S. does not need to control Greenland for security reasons as Trump claims because since 1951 it has had an agreement with Denmark that allows it to place in Greenland any military assets it feels are needed.
One of Lawler’s aides turned down a request from Westfair’s Westchester County Business Journal to interview him about Greenland citing the congressman’s schedule. However, Lawler had gone on the record about Greenland in two interviews with CNN and an interview with Fox Business News. One question not asked during those interviews was from where Lawler thinks the estimated 800-billion to one-trillion dollars or more to pay for a U.S. purchase of Greenland might come.
“I think there is broad bipartisan opposition in Congress to any use of force in relation to Greenland,” Lawler told CNN’s Wolf Blitzer. “I think the president has made an important point about the importance of Greenland strategically and from the standpoint of national and global defense and especially in relation to NATO and combating the malign influence of Russia and China in particular in our hemisphere and certainly in the Arctic region.”
Lawler said he would welcome a Greenland purchase such as had been done when the U.S. purchased Alaska from Russia in 1867 and in the Louisiana Purchase from France in 1803.
“The use of military force in my opinion should be off the table,” Lawler said. “I do not think that is in our interests and certainly not that of our allies.”
Trump, however, continues to threaten to use military force to take Greenland from Denmark, which is a member of NATO. Some NATO members have already sent small military contingents to Greenland as a show of defiance to Trump’s threats. Some European leaders have warned that any U.S. military action against a fellow member of NATO would fracture the alliance.
Lawler previously told CNN’s Kaitlin Collins, “Discussions around the potential either of sale or expanded U.S. military presence in agreement is fine but any use of military force I’m adamantly opposed to, I’ve said that repeatedly. There are real reasons to have a stronger military presence in the Arctic and I think that can be accomplished through negotiation. I think Greenland and Denmark probably would be open to expanded U.S. military presence as well as cooperation on rare-earth minerals. I think there are ways to get there without the U.S. seizing control of Greenland.”
