Selling out Greenland to pander to Trump’s ego could be their ticket for a military double-down gamble in Ukraine.

Join us on Telegram, Twitter, and VK.

Contact us: info@strategic-culture.su

Britain and France last week again pitched their offer of sending troops to Ukraine in the event of a peace deal being worked out between the United States and Russia. Kier Starmer and French President Emmanuel Macron issued a “joint declaration” pledging the deployment of troops.

Russia repeated its warning that any such deployment would be seen as a NATO incursion under the guise of peace monitors and that British and French soldiers would be a “legitimate target.”

London and Paris are both bluffing. They know their talk about the “coalition of the willing” is empty bluster, and is way beyond British and French military capabilities. That is why the European pair have been assiduously courting the Trump administration to commit to security guarantees for their forces in the event of a firefight with Russia.

David Lammy, Britain’s deputy prime minister, travelled to Washington this week to discuss US security backing with Vice President JD Vance. Previously, the Trump administration had backed away from giving such guarantees, knowing that it could lead to an escalation in hostilities with Russia.

However, Trump seems to be coming around to the British and French idea of an American backstop, which is, of course, something that the Kiev regime and the other European leaders have been pleading for as well.

Trump’s aggression towards Venezuela is expanding in international scope, with U.S. naval forces seizing oil tankers bound for Russia and China. The American president also this week gave his backing to a Congressional bill for new, stringent sanctions on Russia.

So, Trump seems to be adopting a tougher stance towards Moscow to extract his coveted peace deal in Ukraine. Hence, his administration’s leaning towards the British-French proposal of providing a security guarantee for their troops in Ukraine.

The British – famed for their Perfidious Albion duplicity – appear to be ingratiating themselves with Trump.

When US military forces seized a Russian-flagged oil tanker in the North Atlantic, they were assisted by the British air force and navy.

The BBC reported: “A Downing Street spokesperson said Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer discussed the joint operation, as well as recent talks on Ukraine and the U.S. operation in Venezuela, in a phone call with President Trump on Wednesday evening.”

Washington thanked London for its assistance in what Moscow condemned as an act of piracy on the high seas. The British, as usual, supported American claims that it had a legal right to seize a ship that Washington unilaterally sanctioned.

Britain’s Starmer also refused to criticize Trump’s armed attack on Venezuela last weekend and the kidnapping of its president, Nicolas Maduro, who was hauled before a New York court along with his wife, shackled in leg irons as in some medieval inquisition.

More ingratiating duplicity came this week when a British establishment cipher backed Trump’s plans to annex Greenland. Peter Mandelson, the former British ambassador to the United States, wrote in The Spectator magazine a glowing tribute to Trump for “bringing Maduro to face justice” and for his plans to secure Greenland from Russia and China. What’s more, Mandelson dismissed Danish and European objections to Trump’s design to annex Greenland as “impotent histrionics.”

Trump’s brash talk about taking over the Arctic island – with a military option if necessary – has caused much consternation among European NATO vassals, primarily Denmark, which has territorial claims over Greenland. Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen has complained that if Trump annexes the oil-rich territory, it will mean the end of NATO. Mandelson is sort of right. The Europeans are whining and will do nothing.

Nevertheless, the British can provide a useful service to Washington by undermining any European objection to Trump’s Greenland designs. This is the traditional role played by London, to act as a wedge for the Americans to impose their policies more easily on the vassals.

In that way, London is leveraging the handover of Greenland to Washington with its renowned rhetorical and legal conjuring skills, regardless of what Greenlanders want.

The ulterior agenda for the British is to inveigle Trump into backing their “peacekeeping mission” in Ukraine with security guarantees.

Given that France is just as keen as Britain to get this favor from Washington, it will be interesting to see what Macron starts to say about American claims on Greenland. European sovereignty and Danish national pride will likely be given short shrift for the higher goal of persuading greater American military involvement in Ukraine.

Britain and France, along with other European powers, desperately need an escalation of conflict with Russia in Ukraine. They have committed so much political and financial capital to a futile project of strategically defeating Russia that they cannot survive a defeat. While they talk about bringing about peace in Ukraine, the real agenda is to escalate the war. To do that, they need American involvement under the cynical pretext of security guarantees.

Selling out Greenland to pander to Trump’s ego could be their ticket for a military double-down gamble in Ukraine.

When Britain ingratiates, alarms go off for a Perfidious Albion maneuver.