The Human Consciousness Now...Our World in the Midst of Becoming...to What? Observe, contemplate Now.
PORTLAND, USA, Apr 2 2025 (IPS) - For most voters, to make America great again, as the 47th president has repeatedly pledged, meant to make the United States markedly superior globally. However, the administration’s actions, policies and program cuts will not improve but only worsen the US’s mediocre standing among advanced countries.
Nevertheless, in order to assess the administration’s prospects to make America great again, it is appropriate and necessary to establish the current standing or rank of the US across various important dimensions.
Regarding economic strength and military power, the United States has the highest rankings worldwide. The US gross national product (GNP), for example, is in first place and well ahead of other countries (Figure 1).
Source: World Bank, OECD and Global Fire Power.
In per capita income, however, the United States falls to around 5th place behind countries such as Luxembourg, Norway, Switzerland and Ireland. Furthermore, America’s debt-to-GDP ratio is the fourth largest among OECD economies, behind Japan, Greece and Italy, and is at its highest level since World War II.
With respect to military power, the United States is in first place. The US maintains its lead in warfare with its sizable armed forces combined with substantial advanced military technologies.
One valued and recognized dimension of societal development and human wellbeing is life expectancy at birth. The US life expectancy at birth of about 78 years is lower than the OECD average of about 80 years. In fact, the US life expectancy at birth ranks about 32nd and well behind Canada, Italy, Japan and Switzerland.
In terms of its ranking, the US life expectancy at birth of about 78 years is lower than the OECD average of about 80 years. In fact, the US life expectancy at birth ranks about 32nd and well behind Canada, Italy, Japan and Switzerland. Despite the fact that the US life expectancy lags behind other wealthy nations, the country’s president issued an executive order rolling back policies to limit drug spending by Medicaid and Medicare.
A related indicator of development is the infant mortality rate. Similar to life expectancy at birth, the infant mortality rate of the United States ranks poorly in comparison to other high-income countries. The US rate is approximately three times the rates of Japan, Norway and Sweden (Figure 2).
Source: United Nations and OECD.
Again despite its relatively low ranking, the administration made far-reaching financial cuts in the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Those and related actions by the administration have contributed to grinding the National Institutes of Health to a halt, set back its scientific reporting and sent shockwaves through academia and the biomedical research institutions.
Another frequent measure of a country’s standing in the world is the level of poverty among its population. Among OECD countries, the United States has the second highest poverty level at 18% and well below Canada (11%), France (9%), Germany (12%), Italy (13 %), Switzerland (10%) and the United Kingdom (12%).
An important dimension reflecting security and public safety is the level of homicides. Again among the OECD countries, the United States has the fourth highest intentional homicide rate and is double the OECD average. Moreover, the US homicide rate is more than ten times the rates of Ireland, Italy, Japan, Norway and Switzerland.
A second measure related to crime is a country’s incarceration rate. Among the OECD countries, the United States has the highest incarceration rate, which is approximately five times the OECD average rate.
One indicator reflecting the health of members of a population is the proportion of its adult population who are obese. Again, the United States is well ahead other developed countries in its level of obesity (Figure 3).
Source: OECD, PEW Research Center, Economic and Social Rights Fulfillment Index and World Happiness Report.
The rate of obesity among US adults is approximately 42% or nearly double the OECD average proportion. In striking contrast, the levels of other countries are much lower, such as in France (10%), Germany (23%), Italy (18%), Japan (8%), Russia (24%), Switzerland (15%) and the United Kingdom (17%). Moreover, with the administration laying off 10,000 employees at the Health and Human Services Department, America’s health conditions are not likely to improve but worsen.
While it leads the world in military power and GNP, the United States is well behind many other advanced countries with respect to life expectancy, infant mortality, health, poverty, homicide and crime, family structure, education, human rights, status of women, maternal mortality and reported happiness
A widely recognized measure of societal development and valued by a country’s citizens is the level of education provided to the general public. Among the top countries having a well-developed public education system are Japan, Denmark, Sweden, the United Kingdom, Finland, Germany and Canada, with the US ranked at approximately the 12th position.
Similarly with respect to student performance at the primary and secondary levels, America is not among the top ten countries. The administration’s decision to eliminate the Department of Education will likely worsen the US standing on public education.
In terms of family structure, the United States leads the world in single-parent household rates, with the large majority of those households missing a father.
In 2023, nearly one in four children in the US aged 0‒17 years, totaling about 19 million, were living in a household without their biological, step, or adoptive father, mostly with their mother (85% of cases). The US proportion of children in single-parent households is markedly higher than the levels of Japan (7%), Mexico (7%), Germany (12%), Canada (15%) and France (16%).
Human rights is a vital aspect of societal well-being and development. The United States typically ranks lower than other high-income OECD countries on human rights indicators.
Among 24 high-income OECD countries, the United States ranks at the bottom at 24th with respect to economic and social rights. And the situation has worsened recently as the president signed a sweeping executive order denouncing federal worker unions as hostile and rescinding collective bargaining agreements of federal union workers.
Closely related to human rights is the status of women. Here again, the United States is not among the top ten countries. Far ahead of the US with respect to the status of women are countries such as Denmark, Finland, Norway and Sweden. Among 29 OECD countries, the US ranks 19th.
Moreover, two indicators of the status of women that have worsened in the US are maternal mortality and political violence against women. The US has the highest level of maternal mortality among OECD countries. Also, women in the US who take on political leadership are frequent targets of violence and harassment.
Finally with respect to reported happiness among its citizens, the United States is not among the top countries. Whereas the top four countries in 2025 are Finland, Denmark, Iceland and Sweden, the US ranks 24th among countries in terms of life satisfaction.
The relatively low ranking of the United States on reported happiness is believed to be due to the cost of living, economic uncertainty and the political polarization. The administration’s recent decisions and rhetoric have only increased economic uncertainty and political polarization across the United States.
Also, many are concerned about proposals to alter the country’s social safety. As the administration and Republican Congressional leaders push to pass a tax cut extension, they are considering reforms and cost reductions to the country’s major entitlement programs that are consuming about half of all federal spending, in particular Medicaid, Medicare and Social Security.
In sum, while it leads the world in military power and GNP, the United States is well behind many other advanced countries with respect to life expectancy, infant mortality, health, poverty, homicide and crime, family structure, education, human rights, status of women, maternal mortality and reported happiness.
The administration’s actions, policies, program cuts and employee firings will not improve but likely only worsen America’s mediocre standing on virtually every major measure of societal wellbeing and development. Finally, about that unremitting pledge by the US president to make America great again, it’s well on its way to the graveyard of vain political slogans.
Joseph Chamie is a consulting demographer, a former director of the United Nations Population Division and author of numerous publications on population issues, including his recent book, “Population Levels, Trends, and Differentials”.
UNITED NATIONS, Apr 2 2025 (IPS) - After nearly two years of extended warfare and protracted crises as a result of the Sudanese Civil War, Sudan remains the world’s biggest internal displacement crisis. According to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), heightened insecurity, widespread famine, economic strife, and climate shocks threaten the lives of approximately 25.6 million people.
On March 28, the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) released a report examining the scale of needs in Sudan. It is currently estimated that roughly half of Sudan’s population faces acute food insecurity. Famine has been declared in five areas, including North Darfur and the Western Nuba mountains. FAO predicts that famine is imminent in numerous conflict hotspots, such as Darfur, Khartoum and Kordofan.
As a result of unrelenting insecurity in Sudan for nearly two years, agricultural systems have been decimated. Climate shocks, damage to critical infrastructures, and the lack of essential services, such as veterinary care and gardening tools, have made it nearly impossible for the majority of Sudanese civilians to self-sufficiently produce food or income. FAO estimates that the livelihoods of nearly two-thirds of the population have been disrupted.
“This is a full-scale hunger crisis and I’m going to call it a catastrophe. The civil war has killed thousands, uprooted millions and set the country ablaze, and yet it’s forgotten, (despite being) the epicentre of the world’s largest and most severe hunger crisis ever,” said World Food Programme (WFP) Director Cindy McCain.
Zahra Abdullah, a Sudanese refugee residing in the Al Salam displacement shelter bordering Nyala City, told Doctors Without Borders (MSF) of the harsh living conditions for displaced civilians.
“This is not the first war I have experienced, but it is definitely the most devastating to my life. The living conditions here are harsh, and everything is a daily struggle…But even so, the suffering never ends. It starts with finding clean water to drink, continues with trying to provide enough food, and ends with finding a place to sleep. Sometimes I sit alone and think: is this the life I will live forever?” said Abdullah.
FAO urgently requires 156.7 million USD to provide food assistance to over 14.2 million people in 2025. FAO’s investments in the agricultural sector include deliveries of crop packages, livestock vaccinations, and economic assistance for families who run fisheries. If fully funded, this would enable Sudanese civilians to produce income self-sufficiently and diversify their diets, helping to offset malnutrition and food insecurity.
In their March 30 situation update on the current levels of insecurity in Sudan, UNHCR reported high levels of conflict present in the Khartoum, Kordofan, Darfur, and White Nile States, with regular airstrikes and artillery shellings destroying civilian infrastructures and causing significant civilian casualties.
According to figures from the United Nations (UN), there have been dozens of reported casualties and over 120,000 internal civilian displacements in the past few weeks alone. Within the first three months of 2025, Action on Armed Violence (AOAV) has recorded 1,925 civilian casualties as a result of explosive weapons in Sudan.
On March 25, the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) conducted an airstrike on the Tura Market, which is roughly 45 kilometers away from El Fasher in the North Darfur state. Although the total number of civilian casualties has yet to be confirmed, it is estimated to fall between 100 and 270. Adam Rejal, a spokesperson for the Sudanese humanitarian organization General Coordination, stated that women accounted for more than half of the casualties.
According to the latest figures from the International Organization for Migration (IOM) Displacement Tracking Matrix (DTM) update, there are currently over 11 million internally displaced civilians in Sudan, with the majority having been displaced from Khartoum, South Darfur, and North Darfur.
Despite conflict continuing to rage on in Sudan, IOM recorded a decrease in internal displacements by 2.4 percent between December 2024 and March 2025. Although IOM estimates that roughly 400,000 internally displaced civilians have begun returning to their homes in Al Jazirah, Khartoum, and Sennar, many have returned to areas that lack critical resources such as food, shelter, and healthcare. According to the Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), bombardments and artillery shellings have destroyed or significantly damaged a litany of critical infrastructures, including water reservoirs, hospitals, and schools.
“While many people are eager to return home, the conditions for safe and sustainable return and integration are not yet in place,” said Mohamed Refaat, Chief of Mission of IOM Sudan. “Basic services including healthcare, protection, education, and food are scarce, and the lack of functional infrastructure and financial capacity will make it difficult for families to rebuild their lives.”
Levels of displacement have been on the rise in North Darfur and the White Nile states due to heightened insecurity in those areas. The UN and its partners remain on the frontlines of this crisis, providing basic services and nutritional assistance to communities that have been hit the hardest by this crisis.
On March 27, WFP delivered 1,200 metric tons of food to roughly 100,000 people in the Bahri and Omdurman regions in Khartoum, marking the first time WFP deliveries had successfully reached civilians in the area since the latest surge of hostilities.
IPS UN Bureau Report
LONDON, Apr 2 2025 (IPS) - Today’s multiple and connected crises – including conflicts, climate breakdown and democratic regression – are overwhelming the capabilities of the international institutions designed to address problems states can’t or won’t solve. Now US withdrawal from global bodies threatens to worsen a crisis in international cooperation.
The second Trump administration quickly announced its withdrawal from the Paris Agreement and the World Health Organization (WHO), terminated its cooperation with the UN Human Rights Council, walked out of negotiations on a global tax treaty and imposed sanctions on International Criminal Court officials.
Although the USA has sometimes been an obstructive force, including by repeatedly blocking Security Council resolutions on Israel, global institutions lose legitimacy when powerful states opt out. While all states are formally equal in the UN, the reality is that the USA’s decisions to participate or quit matter more than most because it’s a superpower whose actions have global implications. It’s also the biggest funder of UN institutions, even if it has a poor record in paying on time.
As it stands, the USA’s WHO withdrawal will take effect in January 2026, although the decision could face a legal challenge and Trump could rescind his decision if the WHO makes changes to his liking, since deal-making powered by threats and brinkmanship is how he does business. But if withdrawal happens, the WHO will be hard hit. The US government is the WHO’s biggest contributor, providing around 18 per cent of funding. That’s a huge gap to fill, and it’s likely the organisation will have to cut back its work. Progress towards a global pandemic treaty, under negotiation since 2021, may be hindered.
It’s possible philanthropic sources will step up their support, and other states may help fill the gap. The challenge comes if authoritarian states take advantage of the situation by increasing their contributions and expect greater influence in return. China, for example, may be poised to do so.
That’s what happened when the first Trump administration pulled out of the UN Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). China filled the vacuum by increasing its contributions to become UNESCO’s biggest annual funder. Presumably not coincidentally, a Chinese official became its deputy head, while China was able to block Taiwan’s attempts to join. It was out of concern about this growing influence that the Biden administration took the USA back into UNESCO in 2023; that decision could now be reversed, as Trump has claimed UNESCO is biased against the USA and ordered a review.
The Human Rights Council may be less immediately affected because the USA isn’t currently a member, its term having ended at the close of 2024. It rejoined in 2021 after Trump pulled out in 2018, and had already made the unusual decision not to seek a second term, likely because this would have provoked a backlash over its support for Israel. Apart from its relationship with Israel, however, during its term under the Biden administration the USA was largely recognised as playing a positive role in the Council’s business. If it refuses to cooperate, it deprives US citizens of a vital avenue of redress.
The USA’s actions may also inspire other states with extremist leaders to follow suit. Argentina’s President Milei, a keen Trump admirer, has imitated him by announcing his country’s departure from the WHO. Political leaders in Hungary and Italy have discussed doing the same. Israel followed the USA in declaring it wouldn’t engage with the Human Rights Council. For its own reasons, in February authoritarian Nicaragua also announced its withdrawal from the Council following a report critical of its appalling human rights record.
It could be argued that institutions like the Human Rights Council and UNESCO, having survived one Trump withdrawal, can endure a second. But these shocks come at a different time, when the UN system is already more fragile and damaged. Now the very idea of multilateralism and a rules-based international order is under attack, with transactional politics and hard-nosed national power calculations on the rise. Backroom deals resulting from power games are replacing processes with a degree of transparency aimed at achieving consensus. The space for civil society engagement and opportunities for leverage are in danger of shrinking accordingly.
Real reform needed
Revitalising the UN may seem a tall order when it’s under attack, but as CIVICUS’s 2025 State of Civil Society Report outlines, civil society has ideas about how to save the UN by putting people at its heart. The UNMute Civil Society initiative, backed by over 300 organisations and numerous states, makes five calls to improve civil society’s involvement: using digital technologies to broaden participation, bridging digital divides by focusing on connectivity for the most excluded, changing procedures and practices to ensure effective and meaningful participation, creating an annual civil society action day as an opportunity to assess progress on civil society participation and appointing a UN civil society envoy.
Each of these ideas is practical and could open up space for greater reforms. A UN civil society envoy could, for example, promote best practices in civil society participation across the UN and ensure a diverse range of civil society is involved in the UN’s work.
Civil society is also calling for competitive Human Rights Council elections, with a civil society role in scrutinising candidates, and limits on Security Council veto powers. And as time approaches to pick a new UN Secretary-General, civil society is mobilising the 1 for 8 billion campaign, pushing for an open, transparent, inclusive and merit-based selection process. The office has always been held by a man, and the call is for the UN to make history by appointing a feminist woman leader.
These would all offer small steps towards making the UN system more open, democratic and accountable. There’s nothing impossible or unimaginable about these ideas, and times of crisis create opportunities to experiment. States that want to reverse the tide of attacks on international cooperation and revitalise the UN should work with civil society to take them forward.
Andrew Firmin is CIVICUS Editor-in-Chief, co-director and writer for CIVICUS Lens and co-author of the State of Civil Society Report.
For interviews or more information, please contact research@civicus.org.
JERUSALEM, Apr 2 2025 (IPS) - The end of the tenuous ceasefire in Gaza is having disastrous consequences for women and girls. From 18 to 25 March—in just those 8 days, 830 people were killed—174 women, 322 children, with 1,787 more injured.
Let me break that down because these are not just numbers, they are people: every single day from the 18 to 25 March, an average of 21 women and over 40 children are killed.
This is not collateral damage; this is a war where women and children bear the highest burden. They comprise nearly 60 per cent of the recent casualties, a harrowing testament to the indiscriminate nature of this violence.
What we are hearing from our partners and the women and girls we serve is a call to end this war, to let them live. It is a situation of pure survival and survival of their families. Because as they say, there is simply nowhere to go. They are telling us they will not move again, since no safe places anyway.
As a woman recently said to us from Deir Al Balah, “My mother says, ‘Death is the same, whether in Gaza City or Deir al-Balah… We just want to return to Gaza.” This is a feeling that is shared by many other women I had an opportunity to meet with during my last visit in January and February.
How is the UN helping civilians in Gaza?. Credit: UNICEF/Abed Zagout
The UN says Gaza is facing a food crisis.
Another woman from Al-Mirak tells us “We’re glued to the news. Life has stopped. We didn’t sleep all night, paralyzed. We can’t leave. My area is cut off. I’m terrified of being hit – every possible nightmare races through my mind.” This is simply no way of living.
Since March 2nd, humanitarian aid has been halted by the Israelis. And people’s lives are again at risk since the Israeli bombardments resumed on March 18.
The ceasefire, while brief, had provided some breathing. During that time, I had the opportunity to visit some of our partner organizations who were repairing their offices in Gaza City with what material was available. I saw neighbours coming together to clean some of the rubble on their streets, heard children playing. Met with women who expressed their fragile hope for peace and for rebuilding their lives. I saw thousands of people on the roads back to Gaza City.
And now that hope is gone. For now, 539 days, the relentless war has ravaged Gaza, obliterating lives, homes, and futures. This is not merely a conflict; it is a war on women—on their dignity, their bodies, their very survival.
Women have been stripped of their fundamental rights, forced to exist in a reality where loss is their only constant. Cumulatively, over 50,000 people have been killed and more than 110,000 injured.
It is crucial to protect the rights and dignity of the people of Gaza, especially women and girls, who have borne the brunt of this war. Women are desperate for this nightmare to cease. But the horror persists, the atrocities escalate, and the world seems to be standing by, normalizing what should never be normalized.
As we have seen in these 18 months of war, women play a crucial role during times of crisis. However, after all this time, they speak of being trapped in a never-ending nightmare.
This war must end. I, and others, have echoed this plea countless times, amplifying the voices of the women inside Gaza. Yet the devastation deepens.
What will we tell future generations when they ask? That we did not know? That we did not see?
International humanitarian law must be upheld. The systems we established to protect humanity must be respected. All humans must be treated equally. This war is shattering core values and principles.
As UN Women, we join the UN Secretary-General in his strong appeal for the ceasefire to be respected, for unimpeded humanitarian access to be restored, and for the remaining hostages and all those arbitrarily detained to be released immediately and unconditionally.
Maryse Guimond, UN Women Special Representative in Palestine, speaking at the Palais des Nations from Jerusalem, on the disastrous consequences for women and girls following the end of a tenuous ceasefire in Gaza.
IPS UN Bureau
BEIJING, Apr 1 2025 (IPS) - Bangladesh’s Chief Adviser, Professor Muhammad Yunus’s state visit to China, where he met Chinese President Xi Jinping, was seen as an opportunity to reaffirm old diplomatic and economic ties between the two countries.
During the meeting, Xi recalled Chinese-Bangladesh’s long-standing history of friendly exchanges, saying the ancient Silk Road closely linked the two countries.
Terming Bangladesh a good neighbour, good friend and good partner of mutual trust, he said China maintains a high degree of stability and continuity in its good-neighbourly and friendly policy toward Bangladesh, as this year marks the 50th anniversary of the establishment of China-Bangladesh diplomatic relations.
“China is ready to work with Bangladesh to bring China-Bangladesh cooperation to new heights and deliver greater benefits to the two peoples, Xi said, stressing that China and Bangladesh should continue to deepen political mutual trust and firmly support each other on issues related to mutual interests.
Yunus said Bangladesh and China share a profound friendship and have always understood, respected and trusted each other.
Claiming China is a reliable partner and friend of Bangladesh, he said Bangladesh firmly supports the one-China principle.
The Chief Adviser said Bangladesh is willing to use the 50th anniversary of the establishment of Bangladesh-China diplomatic relations as an opportunity to enhance bilateral relations.
Bangladesh sought more Chinese investment, which will help it promote its economic transition.
Political analysts assert that Yunus’s visit to China has catapulted Bangladesh-China relations to unprecedented heights, with Bangladesh securing a commitment of USD 2.1 billion in Chinese investments, loans, and grants during his historic China tour.
Chinese Ambassador in Dhaka Yao Wen said nearly 30 Chinese companies have pledged to invest USD 1 billion in Bangladesh.
China has also planned to lend some USD 400 million in the Mongla port modernisation project, USD 350 million in the development of the China Industrial Economic Zone and another USD 150 million as technical assistance. The rest of the amount would come as grants and other forms of lending.
“It is a milestone visit,” Yao Wen said.
During the bilateral meeting, Yunus asked Xi to approve the investment of Chinese private companies in Bangladesh.
The Chinse President affirmed that he would encourage Chinese firms to set up manufacturing plants in Bangladesh.
The talks between Yunus and Xi were comprehensive, fruitful and constructive, marked by warmth, Chief Adviser’s Press Secretary, Shafiqul Alam, said.
Chart Roadmap for Shared Prosperity
On March 27, Yunus addressed the Boao Forum for Asia (BFA) Annual Conference in Hainan, asking the Asian nations to chart a clear roadmap for a shared future and shared prosperity.
“In this changing world, the fates of Asian countries are intertwined. We must chart a clear roadmap for a shared future and shared prosperity,” he said.
The Chief Adviser also focused on creating a sustainable financing mechanism for Asian countries. “We need reliable funds that address our challenges and meet our growing demands.”
About trade cooperation, he said Asia remains one of the least integrated regions and this weak integration stifles investment and trade.
“We must work to boost trade cooperation immediately,” he said.
Referring to food and agriculture cooperation, Yunus said the Asian countries should promote resource-efficient farming and domestic production must be enhanced for food security.
“We need to reduce import reliance and achieve self-sufficiency. Expanding tech-based sustainable agricultural solutions and innovation in regenerative and climate-smart farming is key,” he said.
The Bangladesh Chief Adviser stressed building a strong tech ecosystem, sharing knowledge and data and investing in technology incubation and innovation in Asia.
About social business to solve social problems, he said every young person should grow up as a three-zero person: zero net carbon emissions, zero wealth concentration, and zero unemployment through entrepreneurship in social business.
“This is the shared future we in Asia must create together,” he added.
In his speech, Yunus underscored shifting toward sustainable economic models prioritising people and the planet over profits.
“We must shift toward sustainable economic models that prioritise people and the planet over profits,” he said.
Besides, the Chief Adviser focused on the long-pending Rohingya crisis, calling upon the Asian leaders to come forward towards ensuring safe and dignified repatriation of displaced Rohingyas to Myanmar.
“Bangladesh has been hosting over 1.2 million Rohingyas, who are Myanmar nationals, for over seven years. We continue to bear significant social, economic, and environmental costs,” he said.
On the sidelines of the conference, Yunus held meetings with Chairman of the Boao Forum for Asia and former UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, Russian Deputy Prime Minister Alexei Overchuk and FAO Director General Qu Dongyu, among others, too.
Imagine Changing the World
On March 29, 2025, at a function at Peking University (PKU) in Beijing, Yunus urged students to think broadly and strive to transform the world.
“A university or educational institution is not only a place to learn what happens but to imagine,” he said.
Terming imagination the greatest power of the earth, Yunus said, “If you imagine, it will happen. If you do not imagine, it will never happen.”
The Bangladesh Chief Adviser said imagination is more powerful than anything “we can bring together”.
“Human journey is about making the impossible possible. That is our job. And we can make it happen,” Yunus said.
He said people become poor due to wrong economic systems, as all people are not given a fair chance in such systems.
He stressed promoting human beings to become entrepreneurs, not to be job seekers, saying, “All human beings are entrepreneurs.”
Yunus received an honorary doctorate degree from Peking University.
IPS UN Bureau Report
BARCELONA, Spain, Apr 1 2025 (IPS) - “…I am convinced that Greenland’s importance to U.S. interests will grow. Thanks to geography, historical ties (…), the United States has the inside track when competing for influence in Greenland (even as the Chinese have now started making regular visits)…” This quote from a diplomatic cable sent by the U.S. embassy in Copenhagen to Washington might seem recent, perhaps just before President Trump’s abrupt announcement of his intentions to “buy” or “annex” Greenland from Denmark, but that is not the case.
This message is actually seventeen years old, dating back to May 16, 2008. It is one of several Greenland-related cables that came to light with WikiLeaks, highlighting the fact that U.S. interest in Greenland is nothing new. It has been a consistent theme in U.S. foreign policy for at least the last 150 years.
The first documented discussion within the U.S. Government about acquiring Greenland dates back to 1867, the same year the U.S. purchased Alaska from the Russian Empire for $7.7M.
After so many failed attempts by the U.S. to purchase Greenland over the past 150 years, what makes Trump believe that he will succeed? Is the current White House policy—so aggressive and public—really the best way for the U.S. to regain influence, or even secure a new role in Greenland?
Around that time, internal consultations took place in the U.S. Federal Government regarding the possibility of buying Greenland (along with Iceland) for around $5.5M. In fact, the State Department even published a report on the matter in 1868. However, as we know, this proposal never materialized.
More fruitless discussions followed in 1910, and then, suddenly, another purchase occurred in 1916. This time, the U.S. government bought not Greenland but the Danish West Indies in the Caribbean (now known as the U.S. Virgin Islands) from Denmark for $25M.
The relevance of this purchase in the Greenland case is substantive because one provision in the international treaty that formalized the deal—known as the Treaty of the Danish West Indies—stated that the U.S. Government “will not object to the Danish Government extending their political and economic interests to the whole of Greenland.”
Because in 1916 Denmark controlled significant portions of Greenland but not the entire island. However, following the West Indies deal with the U.S., and with Washington’s consent, Denmark began a series of diplomatic movements that eventually allowed it to declare full sovereignty over all of Greenland. Only Norway contested this claim but lost in the International Court of Justice in 1933.
In April 1940, Nazi Germany occupied Denmark, and following that, the U.S. occupied Greenland, in order to prevent its seizure by Germany or eventually by Canada or even by the UK.
After WWII, the Danish government expected the U.S. to withdraw its troops. However, to their surprise, in 1946, the U.S. made a new proposal to purchase Greenland, this time offering $100M. Once again, the deal did not go through, and despite Copenhagen’s diplomatic efforts, the U.S. military stayed.
With the creation of NATO—and Denmark being one of its founding members—Copenhagen changed its policy, accepting the status quo. In 1951, Denmark signed an agreement allowing the U.S. to continue its military and defense activities in Greenland. In 1955, new serious discussions within the U.S. government about another potential offer emerged, and there is evidence that Vice President Nelson Rockefeller was behind another unsuccessful attempt in 1970.
With the end of the Cold War, U.S. interest in Greenland dramatically decreased, and most U.S. military bases on the island were dismantled, except for the one in Pituffik (then known by the Danish name of Thule).
With the start of the new millennium, the increasing effects of climate change and the escalation of geostrategic interest in the Arctic region, Washington reactivated its interest in the largest island on the planet.
However, this time rather than proposing another purchase to Denmark—after so many failed attempts—the U.S. opted for a more subtle policy, indirectly supporting Greenland’s pro-independence movement. The idea was that a newly independent and potentially weak Greenland could be more easily influenced by the U.S.
The surprise came in 2019 when President Trump reignited public debate on the issue and even cancelled an official trip to Copenhagen at the last minute after the Danish Prime Minister publicly rejected the possibility of selling Greenland.
With Biden in office, the issue was largely forgotten—until recently, when Trump brought it back, adopting an even more aggressive approach. It is no coincidence, then, that the U.S. opened a Consulate in Nuuk, Greenland’s capital, in 2020, despite the country’s small population of around 50,000 people and a negligible number of U.S. residents, aside from the few U.S. military personnel stationed at Pituffik.
The key questions here are: after so many failed attempts by the U.S. to purchase Greenland over the past 150 years, what makes Trump believe that he will succeed? Is the current White House policy—so aggressive and public—really the best way for the U.S. to regain influence, or even secure a new role in Greenland? Could this approach, in fact, jeopardize U.S. interests in the region in the long term? And last but not least, beyond the Danish Government, the Greenlanders may have something to say, and judging by the results of the recent elections, it seems they are not really in the mood to accept Trump’s expansionism.
Manuel Manonelles is Associate Professor of International Relations at Blanquerna-Ramon Llull University in Spain
UNITED NATIONS, Apr 1 2025 (IPS) - The Trump administration’s ground-rules are dangerously clear—and devastating.
If you are a pro-Palestinian demonstrator, denouncing Israeli atrocities in Gaza, you are either a supporter of the “terrorist organization” Hamas or you are described as anti-Semitic veering on hate crimes liable for prosecution.
The US is planning to cancel over 300 visas and has threatened to deport students who participated in pro-Palestinian demonstrations in-and-outside university campuses—and also warned it would revoke the green cards of permanent residents.
The New York Times March 31 quoted Stephen Walt, a professor of international relations at Harvard University, as saying, the Trump administration is following a familiar playbook towards strongman rule.
“First the judges, then the universities, then the press, then the lawyers—there are no rules Trump is not willing to break.”
So, is the United Nations far behind? —And are the privileges and protection provided to UN diplomats and staffers in the 1947 UN-US headquarters agreement in jeopardy?
The new ground rules, meanwhile, have prompted the UN to send a memo to staffers cautioning about their activities outside the UN premises.
The memo, released last month, reads: “We must be mindful at all times of our rights and duties as international civil servants, which require us to act independently and impartially.”
“Please take a moment to familiarize yourselves with the policies on the Status, basic rights and duties of United Nations staff members; outside activities; and the guidelines for the personal use of social media”.
Accordingly, “we should frame any public communications, including through the personal use of social media, in a manner that is consistent with the position of the Organization and the statements of the Secretary-General.”
Dr Palitha Kohona, a former Chief of the UN Treaty Section, told IPS: “To begin with, UN staffers must comply with their legal and moral obligations to act consistent with the Charter, including in making statements”.
There is no room, he pointed out, to give expression to personal prejudices in this context. “Their responsibility is to ensure that the Charter mandated requirements are satisfied in all their actions”.
“If the host authorities were to take offence at a UN staffer discharging his/her responsibilities consistent with the Charter, then we have a problem,” he said.
One would expect that the host state, which always cites chapter and verse of the law to justify its actions, would also act within the perimeters set by treaties and other legal norms.
“But it is also a fact that we live in challenging times”, said Dr Kohona, a former Permanent Representative of Sri Lanka to the United Nations, and most recently Ambassador to China.
A second UN memo to staffers is equally cautious in its warning.
Titled “Proof of Identity if Stopped by Authorities in New York,” the memo reads: “We would like to remind all staff members and their families of the importance of carrying a form of identification at all times. This may include your United Nations identification card (UN Grounds Pass) or a copy of your national passport with G-4 visa (paper copy or digital copy on your phone).”
“While the likelihood of a situation requiring you to produce such documents to confirm your identity/employment remains low, we want to ensure that everyone is prepared. Should you be detained and require immediate support in this regard, please contact the UN Security & Safety Service Control Center at (212) 963-6666 (available 24/7)”.
Asked if there were any threats to diplomats or staffers, UN Spokesperson Stephane Dujarric told reporters: “’t think, there is no indication that there is a targeting of UN staff or diplomatic staff. I think some colleagues were probably a little nervous. And I think, it’s basic advice.
And if you’re not a citizen of a country and you’re in that country, carry some ID to prove your status. And that was what the advice given to our colleagues”, he said.
Asked about revoking 300 visas, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio told reporters last week: “No, no, no, you guys – you asked – the question was, was there 300? I know that number’s been cited. I said it might be more because we’re doing them every day, primarily student visas, and some visitor visas.”
“I don’t know actually if it’s primarily student visas. It’s a combination of visas. They’re visitors to the country. If they’re taking activities that are counter to our foreign – to our national interest, to our foreign policy, we’ll revoke the visa”, he warned.
Are all of those related to pro-Palestinian protests?
“I’m trying to remember – there’s a lot of them now, because I’ve gone through every one of them. I think there might be a few that are not, that are related to other groups that are – of people – we’ve also identified – but this actually is – it should be automatically revoked. We’ve also identified people that have criminal charges and even while in the country, and still have active visas. Some are unrelated to any protests and are just having to do with potential criminal activity,” he declared.
Meanwhile, in a memo to staffers, Narda Cupidore, President of the UN Staff Union (UNSU) said the Union recognizes that these are incredibly challenging times, with anxiety and uncertainty being experienced due to the organization’s current financial situation.
The global situation only adds to this stress, and the lack of consistent and timely information is frustrating, she argued, especially with the frequent negative media coverage. It is important to be discerning with information received and be mindful of its source and accuracy of content.
Social media, as a source of information about the United Nations, often creates unnecessary fear, she pointed out. “I take this opportunity to remind all to exercise personal safety and be aware of your surroundings, always remain vigilant and alert. Practice good judgment when engaging with local law enforcement in the Host Country using courtesy and respect as a general principle.”
As international civil servants and foreign nationals, she pointed out, “we are guests in the Host Country, and we are expected to comply with local laws. Should you experience or encounter any issues (during travel or otherwise), report these incidents to your respective Executive Office and copy the Staff Union and Staff Representative in your reporting”.
IPS UN Bureau Report