Fortifying the American Hemisphere
This article was submitted by guest author Robyn (aka Norene Weaver) over at Liminal States. Please check out their work and donate, if you like what you read.
President Trump has signaled many surprising changes in US policy. Trade wars with America’s allies, hostile takeovers of its neighbors, and military withdrawal from Europe all serve his plans for global realignment.
Annexing the North
Soon after winning the 2024 Presidential Election Donald Trump made surprising comments about annexing territory from America’s allies. Trump said that America needed Greenland for security reasons, and that the planned tariffs on Canadian goods would be lifted if the “Great State of Canada” joined the Union. These offers were initially received as jokes or bluster, but after finding that the President was serious the governments of Canada and Denmark retaliated with their own tariffs.
According to Steve Bannon the purpose of annexation is western hemispheric control: Trump wants to secure the north against Russia and the south against China. Panama has already been compelled to withdraw from the Belt and Road Initiative after Trump’s threat to retake the Panama Canal.
As climate change accelerates, the Northwest Passage is becoming navigable. This sea route passes between Greenland and the Canadian Arctic islands and is the shortest shipping route between the Atlantic and Pacific. Controlling the Northwest Passage will be an enormous strategic advantage and a potential cause for conflict between Canada and Russia. Canada and Denmark’s inability to defend their Arctic territory in such a conflict is the reason for the proposed annexations.
Unreliable Allies
America’s security demands were discussed at the January meeting of Canada’s First Ministers, where a joint Canada-US base was proposed by the Premier of Alberta. In the old days of the American Century Washington’s strategic demands could be satisfied by letting it set up bases in your country. However, the Trump Administration has no interest in expanding the “empire of bases.”
In his first term Trump wanted NATO members to boost their own spending instead of relying on US arms. That hasn’t changed, but the stakes have: either Canada and Denmark militarize the Arctic on their own, or they do it after America takes over.
An invasion of Canada or Greenland would force the breakup of NATO: the European allies cannot possibly defend them against America. These threats carry weight because of Trump’s long-established willingness to exit NATO if America’s allies don’t “pay their bills.”
The President has clearly moved American strategy away from international obligations like NATO or the UN. Pentagon resources are being redirected to an Iron Dome style missile shield and to the Mexican border. Under these conditions America could not secure Europe’s borders even if it wanted to.
Rearming Europe
Europe’s leaders have received the message that the NATO allies can no longer depend on American security guarantees. Germany’s incoming chancellor is calling for an independent EU military and nuclear umbrella while he rushes to double Germany’s rearmament fund. Britain’s government has committed to an historic military budget increase. France continues to increase its military budget beyond 2% of GDP and is pushing for Europe to adopt their SAMP/T NG system instead of American Patriot missiles.
American tariffs on steel and aluminum will force much of those materials to remain in Canada and Europe without buyers. There is a limit to how much can be diverted to other markets: new supply chains have to be negotiated, shipping costs more than exporting across the Canadian border, and few markets consume as much material as the USA. Production and price cuts would naturally follow these difficulties.
There is a natural confluence of interest here: the government can meet military spending targets and stimulate the economy, while the military-industrial complex secures cheap supply contracts. Thus the stated purpose of Britain’s new military budget is to “drive economic growth and create jobs across the UK, while bolstering national security and protecting borders.”
Washington is forcing these policies on its allies using tariffs as well as unilateral budget cuts. Days after meeting with DOGE, Defense Secretary Hegseth ordered the Pentagon to cut its budget by 8% every year for the next five years. This would amount to a $64b reduction from the 2024 budget and a 34% reduction from 2024 to 2029.
Tripartite Détente
Washington’s strategic shift prepares for the division of the world into spheres of influence. The US military will focus on shutting China’s Belt and Road Initiative out of the Western Hemisphere and on securing America’s monopoly over trade routes.
Washington’s unilateral cuts to military spending serve as proof of the President’s commitment to détente. On February 13, 2025 Trump said that he wanted a deal with China and Russia to reduce military spending by 50% for all three countries. President Putin commented that “the US would cut by 50 percent and we would cut by 50 percent and then China would join if it wanted.” This cut would be easy and beneficial for Russia if the Ukrainian war could end: military spending rose to 8.7% of GDP in 2024 due to the war. For now the PRC has declined the proposal, saying China’s military budget is already limited to self defense.
Trump’s proposal is part of his Administration’s efforts to close the most tense points of conflict with Russia and China: Ukraine and Taiwan. Trump opened unconditional peace negotiations with Russia, leaving the EU in the cold with empty pockets. He publicly humiliated Ukraine’s President at the White House, and has made impossible demands for rare earth minerals which do not exist in Ukraine.
Trump has repeatedly refused to commit to the defense of Taiwan. Instead he has proposed that the island’s government raise defense spending to 10% of GDP and has threatened tariffs on its strategically vital microchip exports. Taipei’s security depends on the “Silicon Shield,” the fact that its leadership in chip production makes it indispensable to the global economy.
Cooperation with Russia
There has already been discussion between Trump and Putin concerning economic cooperation in the Arctic. US-Russian cooperation could resolve American security concerns in the north, if NATO falls in line.
Even if NATO does pursue rapprochement with Russia its members won’t be disarming. The allies must meet their 5%-of-GDP rearmament targets. Détente will only be temporary, buying time to prepare for the next war.
Europe will need to sort out its relationship with Russia soon. The goal of Trump’s new foreign policy is not to secure Europe against Russia but to “peel” Russia away from China before it becomes a dependent, junior partner. The Administration prefers a world order with three stable blocs, in which Russia holds the balance of power and may swing in favor of Washington. And the Trump Administration is willing to sacrifice Europe’s interests in order to secure its own.
 | A guest post by
|