The double standards of the plastic patriots
Just as Hungary 1956 split the international left for a generation, so Greenland 2026 may do the same for the right
Paul Embery is one of the most interesting, insightful and original voices to have emerged in British journalism for some time — Douglas Murray
It comes to something when self-proclaimed British ‘patriots’ stand and applaud a foreign head of state who has launched an economic assault on their country – thereby imperilling the jobs and livelihoods of thousands of their compatriots – simply because he is angry that their government has objected to his plot to annex the territory of a sovereign nation.
Surely nobody who truly loved Britain or believed in the concepts of national sovereignty, borders and a rules-based order would feel the slightest shred of sympathy for Donald Trump’s plan to impose trade tariffs on European nations that won’t play ball with him over Greenland?
But that’s what certain ‘patriotic’ voices are doing. Trust me, I’ve been arguing with some of them on social media over the past couple of days. And their position baffles me.
I am rapidly coming to the conclusion that Trump Derangement Syndrome does not afflict only the president’s opponents; some of his most passionate supporters suffer from it, too. There seems to be no line that their hero might ever cross that would persuade them to offer even the mildest criticism of him. In that respect, they are beginning to resemble a cult.
Trump is a man who seems to be rapidly losing the plot. And I say that as someone on the left who never joined in with the hysteria that accompanied his two election victories. Though I am no admirer of the man, I felt that a Trump presidency would at least serve as a welcome antidote to the failed liberal-progressive order that had captured the US and much of the West. And I scoffed when my political allies talked of him as a new Hitler.
But Trump’s recent conduct on the global stage has been as shameful as it has been erratic. His letter on Monday to the prime minister of Norway - in which he declared that he no longer feels an obligation to think only of peace because ‘your country decided not to give me the Nobel peace prize’ - was bordering on the demented.
And the disrespect he has shown to Denmark is indefensible. That country is a longstanding and dependable ally of the US. When Islamic militants struck on 9/11 and Article 5 of the Nato treaty – the clause providing for collective defence among members – was invoked for the first time, the Danes stepped up. In the ensuing war in Afghanistan, Denmark lost more soldiers per capita than any other coalition force. And Trump thanks the country by attempting to plunder a territory that has been in union with it for over 200 years.
The Trump worshippers talk pompously of how their man is fighting a ‘civilisational’ battle on behalf of the entire West, and that his threat to grab Greenland is justified as part of that effort. But what sort of civilisation are we defending if we allow demagogic leaders of powerful countries to pillage the territories of peaceable allies? Is such behaviour consistent with the values of freedom, democracy and liberty that we purport to cherish?
‘Ah, but if Trump doesn’t take Greenland, the Russians or Chinese will,’ they counter. Oh, really? Does anyone seriously believe that Putin or Xi is going to invade the territory of a Nato member, knowing, as they surely do, that it would spark a world war? At any rate, under an existing treaty, agreed with Denmark in 1951, the US can place as many military facilities on Greenland as it deems necessary. There is no justification whatsoever for the White House’s insistence on ownership of the place.
When someone like the US’s former national security advisor John Bolton, a staunch ‘neocon’ who has supported pretty much every US military intervention in modern times, describes his president’s actions over Greenland as ‘foolish and contrary to fundamental American interests’, you know that Trump has overstepped the mark.
What’s more, the president isn’t even carrying his own voters on the issue, with, according to a recent poll, just 17% of Americans agreeing with his plan to acquire the territory.
I do wonder if the Trump cultists ever stop to ponder how their man is beginning to undermine the very things that apparently matter to them. Take, for example, his approach to Canada. Trump’s belligerent attitude towards their country caused Canadians to return Mark Carney’s Liberal party to power, just at a time when it appeared that the discredited liberal-progressive order in Canada was collapsing. Similarly, Trump’s hostility towards Europe may well have the effect of setting back the national populism currently surging across the continent, and solidifying support for the EU. Is this what they want?
The cultists might also like to pay a bit of attention to history. When, in 1956, the Kremlin sent Soviet tanks into Hungary to crush a popular uprising against that country’s hardline communist government, it split the international left, including here in Britain. Many leftists saw the aggression by Moscow as inexcusable and denounced it, whereas the hardcore believers (‘tankies’, as they were to become known) defended it as part of the struggle for worldwide socialism. How one was regarded by other activists on the left was, in the years that followed, often determined by what stance one took ‘on Hungary’.
I have a suspicion that Greenland will become the political right’s Hungary. Trump’s aggression has the capacity to split the right asunder and dictate how its activists will be seen in years to come. Do those who profess to believe in national sovereignty and borders – and the right of free countries to defend both – really mean it? Are they as committed to the values of freedom, democracy and liberty as they claim?
Whatever happens in the future, we should never forget where people stood on Greenland, and what they said about it, in the year 2026, when it really mattered.
A reminder that you can follow me on ‘X’: @PaulEmbery
An edited version of the above piece first appeared on the GB News website.
Things Trump has said and done in the past made sense, despite upsetting a lot of folk (mainly those whose cosy arrangements were upset by his actions), but the letter to Norway over the Nobel peace prize is a childish reaction and his stance over Greenland is petulant and pointless. Is the man's mental acuity fading?
Thank you for writing on this Paul, because I too am baffled by the attitude of some on the right towards this outrageous behaviour from Trump. I am a Conservative, and as far as I know all conservatives are in sync with the government on this issue. Some people whose political views are further to the right, however, seem to have developed a strange crush on the orange man, to the extent that they can concoct excuses for anything he does, however bizarre.
Their approval of Trump’s very worrying threats towards ‘certain countries’ who have had the audacity to support a fellow NATO member is even more baffling given that their spiritual leader, Nigel Farage, has firmly (and uncharacteristically) condemned the President.
I have noticed that almost without exception GBNews presenters have been putting forward very unconvincing arguments in favour of Trump seizing Greenland, in the face of unanimous condemnation from guest interviewees and panellists. I find this very odd.
I’m just hoping that political forces within the USA can remind Trump that the power of the President is still limited by democratic processes in that country. He is not yet a dictator, even if he would like to be.