—-Europe does not want a target on its back like it has now because Russia and US can’t agree to get on; why Greenland would help ANY NATION save the climate because it ‘allows for’ higher emissions 2026-2050: CarrZee
Reporting and opinion by Mathew Carr
Jan. 16-18, 2026
As the fictional “The Diplomat” snippet below on Netflix explains … re the importance of Greenland …it is about US vulnerability to Russia ….yet the Netflix snip and the mainstream press crucially ignore Greenland’s low historical emissions, which are also a vital to Trump’s amorous behavior towards the world’s biggest island.
Trump can’t reveal his secret tendencies to protect climate and nature. His mask would slip.
Yes, Greenland’s importance lies in its strategic positioning for nuclear weapons BUT IT IS ALSO valuable in climate/trade negotiations :
So Mr Trump’s focus on Greenland is not about rare earths as he pretends….
Claude AI backs up what the Netflix series said: Facilities on the Scottish coast (south of Greenland) are essential to the UK’s continuous at-sea nuclear deterrent – the policy of always having at least one armed submarine on patrol at all times. Without these Scottish facilities, the UK’s independent nuclear deterrent capability would be impossible to maintain.
This has made the base a significant political issue in Scotland, particularly given support for Scottish independence among some segments of the population and the Scottish National Party’s opposition to nuclear weapons.
CarrZee context:
In 2015, the world signed up to the weak Paris climate deal …which pretty much meant countries could continue doing what they want re the climate. Yet, the deal was strong enough to stir USA into a deliberate period of exaggerated selfish indignation and resistance.
In June 2016 the Brexit vote happened ….an election rigged by lies told by PM Boris Johnson and amplified by the corrupt (American) billionaire press.
It was easier for the USA to control the UK (and keep Britain united) if the latter was OUTSIDE the EU.
The EU was apparently moving too quickly to save the climate …for the likes of greedy petrostate USA.
Without Britain, the EU and its regulatory inclinations were more easily ignored and weakened by the US.
The EU was the only regulatory system big enough to stand up to global American corporations….many of which have been allowed to get too large.
The climate crisis makes property around the world more valuable because it’s needed for alternative energy (biofuels, wind farms, solar plants …even small nukes).
Low population areas like Greenland are arguably more valuable because of their low historical emissions … which means those regions MAY have more rights to future emissions (2026-2050)….plus the world might be about to get REALLY HOT.
Some of Australia is a toasty 44C right now, Friday morning 5am London time.
Claude AI beware …yet this is crucial: The bases in Scotland – HMNB Clyde (Faslane) and RNAD Coulport – are UK bases, operated by the Royal Navy.
These are British military installations, not American ones.
The U.S. does not have a permanent base there or direct control over the facilities.
However, there is significant cooperation between the U.S. and UK on the Trident program:
∙ The UK leases Trident II D5 missiles from a common pool shared with the U.S. Navy
∙ Maintenance and servicing of the missiles happens at U.S. facilities (Kings Bay, Georgia)
∙ The missile technology itself is American-made (Lockheed Martin)
∙ There’s ongoing technical and logistical cooperation between the two countries
But the warheads on UK Trident missiles are British-designed and manufactured, and the submarines are British-built and operated.
The UK maintains independent operational control – meaning Britain can launch its nuclear weapons independently without requiring U.S. permission.
So while the Trident program involves deep UK-US cooperation and interdependence, the Scottish bases themselves are firmly under British sovereignty and Royal Navy control.
Greenland’s remaining carbon budget IS important
That is partly why Trump and Europe has split re Greenland on Saturday.
Guardian:
“Keir Starmer has said Donald Trump’s decision to impose 10% tariffs on the UK and seven other European countries over Greenland was “completely wrong”.
The US president said on Saturday that the levies would apply from 1 February to Nato members – including the UK, France and Germany – who have deployed troops to the territory in response to growing uncertainty over its future.
Trump said the tariffs would rise to 25% on 1 June if a deal to buy Greenland had not been reached.”
Excerpt From
“Keir Starmer says Trump’s threat to impose tariffs over Greenland ‘completely wrong’”
Geraldine McKelvie, Jakub Krupa
The Guardian
This material may be protected by copyright.
https://apple.news/A-edI778XTiKN4SPJ380gcQ
This from former advisor to former UK PM Tony Blair, Campbell
I earlier wrote about Greenland’s climate importance here on BBC Jan 9, 2026 — this explains more about the importance of carbon budgets :
(I made this clearer on Saturday….updated with the news…More to come…comments my way mathew@carrzee.net or x or LinkedIn )
Notes
ChatGPT “map” setting out how Russia can attack USA from both eastern and western Russia
NORTH ▲ |
RUSSIAN FAR EAST | NORTHERN CANADA
(Kamchatka/Pacific Coast) —+——————- ALASKA
(Pacific SSBN patrol areas) | |
| |
↓ East-Going Trajectories | |
| |
| |
PACIFIC OCEAN | |
| |
| |
(Possible SLBM paths) ▼ ▼
CONTIGUOUS U.S.
West Coast (WA, OR, CA) | |
RUSSIAN EUROPE (Western Russia) NORTH ATLANTIC
(ICBMs silo/mobile forces) Route to
U.S. Northeast
|
|
▼
CONTIGUOUS U.S. (East Coast)
What this sketch represents
🟩 Russian Forces & Routes
From the Far East (Pacific):
Submarines (SSBNs) patrol the northern Pacific near the Russian Far East (Kamchatka). SLBMs fired from these boats can travel across the Pacific to the U.S. West Coast.
From Western Russia / Europe:
ICBMs and mobile missiles based in western Russia don’t need to follow one fixed route; the shortest path to the U.S. is over the North Pole toward the U.S. Northeast.
Important points (not visible on the sketch)
Russia doesn’t keep missiles physically pointed at the U.S. in peacetime — the geometry above is about range and potential aerial pathways. Missiles are targeted by command orders only if a launch decision is made; they are not parked with sights permanently aimed at a “dot on the map.” The distances involved are so large that missiles are typically programmed with flight trajectories over the Arctic or across oceans to reach maximum range.
Key Geographic Relationships
🟦 Russia and the U.S. are “near neighbors” across the Arctic
The shortest military trajectories (ICBMs) run over the North Pole — not due east/west. This is why both countries place strategic systems oriented toward polar routes, not lateral coast-to-coast pointing.
🟥 From the Russian Far East
Submarine-launched missiles can fly southward across the North Pacific toward the U.S. West Coast.
Why this matters
✔️ This schematic isn’t about aiming threats — it’s about understanding geographic reach.
✔️ The U.S. and Russia both have weapons that can cross oceans and polar routes; they don’t sit pointed at each other’s coasts like fixed guns.
[…] Why Greenland fight between US, UK is blowing up (in 2 minutes) and why Brexit ‘happened’… West Antarctica holds enough ice to raise sea levels by 4 meters: doc at UNFCCC.int frightens as a reminder about tipping points […]