We support our Publishers and Content Creators. You can view this story on their website by CLICKING HERE.

Whiffs of empire are in the air! Donald Trump has floated the idea of taking over (in some fashion) Greenland, and even dispatched Donald Jr. there on some sort of mission. Then there is the Panama Canal, which we foolishly gave to Panama some years ago, and over which Trump wants to exert some kind of control so it will operate better.

Trump has sounded rather bellicose at times:

That’s Trump, leaving his options open. How meaningful this exchange might be depends on what is meant by “economic coercion,” a highly flexible phrase.

The prospect of a Second American Empire has generated some amusement:

And then, of course, there is Trump’s trolling Justin Trudeau by suggesting that Canada should be our 51st state.

Behind the amusement, there are some serious questions. The Arctic is the subject of a land (or sea) rush for control over raw materials. The Russians and Chinese have been heavily involved in this competition for some years. In this contest, Greenland is a key strategic asset.

Greenland is owned by Denmark but is largely self-governing. There has been talk of independence. Greenland’s prime minister says the island is “not for sale,” but that leaves plenty of room for negotiation. Greenland is virtually uninhabited, with only 57,000 residents. It would be easy for the U.S. to provide economic incentives for that small population that would be hard to turn down.

And the U.S. has no desire to rule over that group of Greenlanders; they could be fully self-governing under some kind of protectorate that would guarantee U.S. security interests. If such a deal could be pulled off, it wouldn’t be as advantageous as the Alaska Purchase, but it might come close.

As for the Panama Canal, we have a strong and legitimate interest in its viability. As recently as 1989, we intervened militarily in Panama to oust Manuel Noriega. I think it is highly unlikely that Trump has anything like that in mind, but it would be entirely appropriate to use “economic coercion” to gain enough control over the Canal to assure its continued efficient functioning.

We are not going to annex Canada, of course. But several Western Canadian provinces have chafed under the gonzo-left leadership of Trudeau. There has been muttering on both sides of the border about the possibility of one or more Western provinces switching allegiance to the U.S., which, under the right circumstances, I would heartily endorse. But with the imminent election of conservative Pierre Poilievre as Prime Minister, that concept (likely impractical in any event) will recede.

What is noteworthy about all of these speculations is that the Trump administration is opening up new possibilities for creative action. Our foreign policy has been hidebound, ineffective, and not particularly geared toward bringing advantage to the American people. Here, as in other areas, Trump will shake things up. And who knows? Maybe he will pull off a 21st century version of Seward’s Folly.