Greenland Compromise: Rent, not Buy

Yesterday I wrote about how Trump is following in the footsteps of Hitler and Stalin over his demand to buy Greenland from Denmark. (See: https://shulmaven.blogspot.com/2026/01/history-rhyming-with-trump-and-greenland.html ) Today Trump said he would not use force to takeover the island, but he certainly did not rule out other forms of coercion. 

My sense is that Trump's art of the deal is aiming for de facto, but not de jure, control of Greenland. Denmark has been very adamant that Greenland is not for sale. Denmark has not commented on whether or not it could be rented. Remember, Trump is a real estate guy. So here goes my idea as one way that Trump could get what he wants.

Instead of purchasing Greenland, the U.S enters into a 99-year lease arrangement with Denmark. The lease terms would give the U.S. full operating control over the island in exchange for an annual lease payment amounting to X- $ billions.  That would more than fund Denmark's current obligations to the 56,000 member Greenland community and then some. Thus Denmark would still retain nominal sovereignty over the Greenland and the island would still fly the Danish flag. 

This result is not pretty, but that is the way negotiations could end up.

History Rhyming with Trump and Greenland

Mark Twain noted that history doesn't necessarily repeat, but it rhymes. This is exactly what is happing with Donald Trump's proposal to seize Greenland. Before Hitler took the Sudetenland in Czechoslovakia in 1938 he threatened to invade. Similarly, Putin made noises about taking Crimea in 2014 before invading that part of Ukraine. It seems that Trump is giving new life to my "Reliving the 1930's series. (See: https://shulmaven.blogspot.com/2023/11/reliving-1930s-part-5.html ) The difference here is that instead of acting like a leader, Trump is acting like a three year-old toddler. He neeeeds Greenland. Unfortunately, his tantrum is breaking up NATO and like the previous episodes I noted, it will make the world a far more dangerous place.

My Review of Amit Segal's "A Call at 4 AM"

 A Primer on Israeli Politics

Leading Israeli reporter Amit Segal has written a primer on Israeli politics going back to the State’s founding. I would characterize his views as center-right. However, a long time Israeli friend and former reporter would argue that Segal is firmly on the Right. In the beginning Israel created a parliamentary system consisting of 120 delegates to the Knesset who would be elected via a party slate by proportional representation, not by constituency. In 1948 with the new state’s boundaries up for grabs, it wasn’t really possible to create individual districts. You would think that accountability would flow through the political parties, but, in fact, the party leaders became personality cults starting with David Ben Gurion. It seems that once in power prime ministers never know when to quit. Ego mania is alive and well in Israeli politics.

 

With 120 seats in the Knesset, a majority of just 61 seats runs the country. For the first 29 years the Mapai Party (Labor) had a monopoly on power. However, since 1977 when a rightwing bloc formed around the Likud Party under the leadership of Menachem Begin took power, it has for the most part represented the dominant coalition in the Knesset. Israeli governments are coalition governments, because even during the heyday of the Labor Party, no party ever achieved a majority.

 

The trick is to put together a coalition of 61 members and for the past 50 years by the dint of demographics and divisions in the Left, rightwing governments tended to run the country. It has to be kept in mind that the distinctions between right and left are not of the American variety. According to Segal, what separates the right from the left is the distance from Yasser Arafat and his successors. Historically the left has been open to a two-state solution while the right has not.

 

Segal points out the reasons for the ascendancy of the right. The 1973 Suez War destroyed the credibility of the left on the security issue. The failure of the 2000 peace talks with Arafat led to the second intifada thereby causing the left to lose the peace issue. In the 2026 election the critical question will be the right’s failure to defend the country on October 7^th, 2023, be enough to topple its long-term hegemony or alternatively will its subsequent success be enough for it to hold power.

 

On the importance of personality over party, Segal highlights the case of General Ariel Sharon who became a Labor Party member to be promoted in the early 1970’s, he then broke with them to help found the Likud Party and later he founded his own party. During his life he built settlements that he would later destroy.

 

Today political divisions in Israel evolve around Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu and the question of Jewish versus Israeli identity. Israelis are either for him or against him, so much so that most center and left parties won’t be in a coalition government with him especially when Netanyahu’s guiding philosophy is “no enemies on the Right,” and no one trusts him. That abstention gives power to the Haredi religious parties whose votes in the Knesset are traded for draft exemptions and huge public subsidies that are bleeding the country white.

 

Those citizens who view themselves as primarily Israeli are largely secular and their views about trading West Bank land for peace with the Palestinians are based on a cold-eyed analysis of Israel’s security. On the other hand, those Israeli’s who view themselves as primarily Jewish view Judea and Samaria as sacred ground of the Bible where their forefathers walked and where David and Solomon were kings and where the prophets spoke truth to power. Thus, control of that land is non-negotiable.

 

After reading Segal’s book I have come to the conclusion that the only way to pull Israeli society together after the brutal Gaza War is for Netanyahu and the center left to form a coalition government that would remove the far-right Ben Gvir and Smotrich factions from the government as well as the religious parties.  ( See: https://shulmaven.blogspot.com/2025/10/my-review-of-yaakov-katz-and-amir.html ) That would lower the temperature in Judea and Samaria and pave the way to radically reduce the power of the Haredi parties. It is not perfect, but as they say, politics is the art of the possible and both the right and the left are going to have to swallow their pride.

Donald Trump (National Socialist) - Part 2

Donald Trump took two more steps down the road to national socialism today. (See: https://shulmaven.blogspot.com/2025/09/donald-trump-national-socialist.html ) First, his Justice Department announced a criminal investigation of Fed Chair Jay Powell to further his attempt to control the central bank. In March 1933 Hitler appointed Hjalmar Schacht to lead the Reichsbank to reinforce his control over the economy and to secretly fund the military as part of his first 100 days.

 

Second, his Department of Labor put out a slogan on social media calling for “One Homeland, One People, One Heritage.”  This slogan brings to mind the Nazi slogan “Ein Volk, Ein Reich, Ein Fuhrer,” which means “one people, one nation, one leader.”  Whether the Department of Labor knew its historical antecedents or not, it is a troubling sign. All the while the Department of Homeland Security is over-reaching, to put it mildly, in rounding up illegal immigrants. To anyone with a historical memory, it is not a pretty sight.

Venezuela: Too Early to Tell

Much has been written about the rendition of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro to the United States to stand trial on drug trafficking and arms smuggling charges. We have had predictable reactions from the Right hailing it as successful operation to remove an anti-American  dictator and from the Left attacking it as a throwback to the Yanqui Imperialism of the early 20^th Century that will lead to a quagmire.

 

To me, it is far early to tell how it will turn out. What we do know is that Maduro was an evil dictator who tortured and murdered his people with abandon and the country has a heavy presence of Russian, Chinese, Iranian, and Cuban forces. Thus, Venezuela represented a threat to U.S. security. Whether the threat is imminent or not is an open question. We also know that Venezuela possesses the largest oil reserves in the world, but much of it consists of tar sands which is costly to produce and that the oil fields are operating in a dilapidated condition causing oil production to drop from three million barrels a day to just under a million barrels a day over the past 20 years.

 

We are far from being reassured by Trump talking about oil and not talking about a return to democracy. Indeed, the entire security apparatus of the Maduro state remains intact. We do not know to what degree Vice President and now President Delcy Rodriguez will cooperate with Trump. She has given off very mixed signals, and we don’t know where the army will end up. We can surmise that given the intelligence that was available to the U.S military, it is likely that someone on the inside is working for us. Who that person or persons are, and their future role will be critical in the days ahead.

 

Trump is opting for stability over democracy. That may work in the short run, but if there aren’t any plans for elections after six months this whole adventure could go south very quickly. It is obvious that the Democratic Opposition would win an election; they did so under Maduro’s control. The question is whether or not the Maduro security apparatus will allow an election to take place and if it does take place will they allow the winner to be seated. Before rushing to judgement let’s give it some time for events to play out.

 

Outside of Venezuela both China and Russia are looking on. They too can make similar moves in the Taiwan straits or the Baltic States, respectively.

My Review of David McWilliams' "The History of Money"

Money Makes the World go Round

 

Irish economist David McWilliams has written a very informative and entertaining book on the history of money with loads of anecdotes. McWilliams views money as one of the great innovations of human beings just behind fire and the wheel. Why? Money facilitates intra-community and inter-community transactions to the benefit of society as a whole. As the great economist Paul Samuelson noted that money is a social contrivance. McWilliams argues that puts human interactions into overdrive as the lust for it propels economic progress.

 

He takes us back in time to the Sumerian Civilization of 2000 BCE where a handful of grain equaled a shekel and where there were lending transactions calling for the payment of interest all the way up today’s quantitative easing of central banks. The first real breakthrough occurred around 1500 BCE where in Lydia the first gold coins were produced. Later Greek and Roman coinage unify the Mediterranean region as one giant free trade zone.

 

McWilliams history is not dry. He introduces us to Johannes Guttenberg of printing press fame who was quite the scoundrel. One of the original users of his new technology was the Catholic Church where the printing press automated the production of indulgences which brought in great wealth. Calligraphy was out and printing was in. He also tells us that much of the church land in Europe came from the foreclosing of mortgages of the nobility. We also witness John Law’s Mississippi Bubble in France which cratered the economy and made banking a scandalous profession where the name bank was not used for years.

 

There is also an interesting vignette on James Joyce, who while living in Trieste owned a movie theater and later owned one in Dublin. The great writer was from immune from the temptations of money.

 

Gold plays a key role in the history of money. It was widely used for centuries as the coin of the realm. For example, the Florin gold piece of the Florence Republic was widely circulated for three hundred years. However, over time gold backed paper notes were used in place of physical gold thereby creating the gold standard.

 

McWilliams is a critic of the gold standard because it places the economy in a straitjacket by limiting the supply of money which, in his opinion, slows economic progress. When money is easy, but not too easy to cause inflation, the way is open for all kinds of invention and innovation. He believes that the gold standard stifled innovation and thus progress making him a strong proponent of the central bank managed (fiat) currencies we have today. Of course, fiat currencies require a high degree of trust in the issuing authority. Without that its value craters.

 

Here, I think, he goes too far. Economist Robert Gordon makes a convincing case that the bulk of economic progress that we have today arose from 1870-1940 where for almost all of that period the gold standard reigned supreme. (See: Shulmaven: My Amazon Review of Robert J. Gordon's "The Rise and Fall of American Growth" ) Think automobiles, electricity, telephones, indoor plumbing, aircraft and radio, for example. I would note that in 1879 the year the U.S. returned to the gold standard both the incandescent light bulb and the telephone were invented and over in Germany the internal combustion engine was invented and in the 1880’s the U.S experienced a record railroad building boom. It is hard to make the case that the gold standard stifled progress. What did in the gold standard were the huge distortions caused by the financing of World War I and the subsequent battles over reparations and inter-war debts.

 

McWilliams argues that money subjugated the people under colonial rule from 1600- 1960. That was certainly true of Belgium’s barbarism in the Congo caused by the need for rubber to make bicycle tires at the turn of the 20^th Century. Those tires were invented by the Irishman John Dunlop. However, Latin America was liberated in the early 1800’s and long-term economic growth in that entire region was hardly stellar.

 

McWilliams has the U.S. leaving the gold standard in 1936; it was, in fact, 1933. He has the United States returning to the gold standard in 1873; it was 1879. In 1873 the U.S. started the process of returning to the gold standard but wasn’t fully realized until the fulfillment of the Resumption of Specie Act in 1879. My quibbles aside, McWilliams has written a very lively book on what makes the world go round.