Will Greenland go up for sale?

 WHAT IS GREENLAND WORTH?

THE ULTIMATE REAL ESTATE DEAL

We hear much talk now of the U.S. buying Greenland from Denmark. Then you hear that Greenlanders want independence from Denmark, that in itself is a complication. Would the Greenland citizens be more open to becoming part of the United States, likely a territory? Donald Trump Jr., someone with experience in the real-estate business, was in Greenland yesterday, was he talking to the Danish or the Greenlanders?

Denmark, says not for sale, but that is often the beginning of business negotiations. Denmark is 1822 miles from Greenland, but only 500 miles from Maine. Denmark has a population of 6 million and Greenland a population of 57,000. Denmark has GDP of $404 billion. Greenland GDP $3.24 billion. Greenland has an area of 836,300 sq. miles, that translates to around 535 million acres. Only the coastal areas are ice free, the rest is ice covered and sometimes as much as a mile deep.

So, what is Greenland worth? Let's face it, it is not ocean front property in southern California or even farmland in Iowa. There is a reason that it has only slightly over 50,000 inhabitants, very few people would ever be willing to live there. I expect the young leave as soon as they are old enough to set out on their own.

So, will Denmark ever consent to selling Greenland? What if an offer was made and it was put up for a referendum? At $100 an acres it would be $535 billion, more than the annual GDP of Denmark.  At $200 an acre it would be over $1 Trillion, approaching 2 1/2 times the GDP. That would be around $18,000 per man women and child in Denmark, or $72,000 for a family of 4. Does anyone doubt that such a deal is possible?

Would it be good deal for the USA? If you are die hard believer in global warming you should be ready to pay lots for waterfront property, just not too close to the water, as it is now.  We could expect the leasing for mineral rights would be a windfall for the U.S. 

What about Denmark? Well they have had this territory for decades and done very little with it. They may not have the financial ability to ever develop it. Can they get more for it? Maybe, what about an auction, Is anyone else interested in this prime re-estate? Maybe China or even Russia, who has lots of experience in developing in the arctic. Wow, Who knows what Denmark could get in a competitive bidding contest? It would be the biggest Re-estate auction in world history.

We will see, as of now it is just the beginning of this possible deal, but don't be too sure that it will not be sold.

Another western leader bites the dust.

 TRUDEAU LATEST TO LOSE CONFIDENCE

WILL IT TRANSLATE TO CHANGE IN CANADA

Justin Trudeau is the latest western leader to lose the confidence of his party and resigned yesterday. We have witnessed the leaders in Germany, France, the UK all becoming out of favor in their countries, We have also seen elections in Georgia, Romania, Austria and also Slovakia and Hungary moving in a rightward direction. We also see sanctions and other responses from other western countries in response to these moves. So much for democracy, it seems it is always endorsed until the wrong people win elections.

Trudeau is popular in the elite globalist community and it seems he wanted to be recognized as a leader. He may have overstepped himself with his vaccine mandates, freezing trucker  bank accounts and a visible disdain for the reality of Canada's resource based economy. I suspect that many of the rural voters in Canada have been inactive and cared little what went on in Ottawa. Trudeau may have awakened them at least temporarily.

The reality is in the parliamentary system, leaders are appointed rather than elected. It is obvious that in most EU countries and in Brussels the agenda of the ruling elite is far different than what the average citizen is concerned about. There is an entrenched bureaucracy that is near impossible to change direction. 

Often the appointed leader is the sacrifice that will be made with promises, but little change in direction. Much like what happens in organized crime when one leader becomes too visible or causes close attention. He is quickly sacrificed to cool the heat. Then business goes on as usual.

Time will tell if new leaders will attempt to set a different course or will they talk about change, but continue on their current path.

BRICS expands to 18 members for 2025.

 NOW HALF WORLD'S POPULATION, 41% GLOBAL ECONOMY

OVER 30 OTHERS INTERESTED IN JOINING

BRICS, originally organized in 2009 by Brazil, Russia, India and China, then added South Africa in 2010. In 2024 Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran and United Arab Republic were added. This year 2025, 9 more countries were offered and have accepted partnerships with BRICS. They are Belarus, Bolivia, Cuba, Indonesia, Kazakhstan, Malaysia, Thailand, Uganda, and Uzbekistan. It is expected that around 30 other countries are under consideration for 2026.

BRICS is an economic union thats main qualification is the abstaining from using sanctions and participating in economic warfare. The escalation of the use of sanctions and economic retaliation and the motto of " you are either an ally or an enemy" has added to the attraction to this union. Many of these countries are already targets of some sort of economic sanctions or pressure to economic submission or social compliance. BRICS hopes to establish a trading group free from such methods and focus on mutual economic prosperity. Only time will see if that is possible.

They have up to now rejected the idea of any one country's currency becoming the new global reserve currency, but at present are doing business in their individual currencies between each other and continue to also use the dollar and Euro for business. They have successfully created a clearing option for transactions between member countries and are hoping to give many developing countries another option other than the present western dominated economic structure. 

They have set up commodity trading centers in Moscow and Shanghai that will trade physical commodities, rather than paper futures contracts that many feel are manipulated with short selling and other exotic trading methods. Up to now most commodities are priced by exchanges in London and Chicago. 

The western world often views BRICS as a security threat to the west's dominance in world affairs. Many of the BRICS members view it as more of another option and hope that all countries can participate economically without the use of economic pressure to control world politics.

The Ukraine war and the economic aftermath have propelled BRICS, in the eyes of much of the world, to be a necessary option to avoid economic manipulation and destruction by others. Despite warnings from the current major powers it seems this arrangement is moving forward, as many feel it is a necessity for their own economic sovereignty and survival.

Will Transnistria become the new bait for Russia?

 EU PRESSURE FOR MOLDOVA TO ABSORB THIS SMALL ENCLAVE

GEOPOLITICAL  GAMESMANSHIP AGAIN

Transnistria or the official name, The Pridnestrovian Moldavian Republics, is a small narrow territory situated between Ukraine and Moldova. The inhabitants prefer to call their country Pridnestrovie and may be offended if referred to as Transnistrians. 

This area has been semi-autonomous since 1924. It has also been under the control of Romania and was formerly part of the Soviet Union. With the breakup of the Soviet Union in 1991 it declared independence from Russia and also from Moldova. The international community considers it part of Moldova. There was an armed conflict between Moldova and this country from March 1992 to July 1992. Russia negotiated a ceasefire between the parties that has been in effect ever since and there are  reasonable relations between Moldova and the region.

Pridnestrovie has its own government, border patrol, police, a small military of around 5000, its own currency and functions independently of Moldova, and a population of around 500,000.

Russia has what it refers to as small peacekeeping force of around 1200 and there is a substantial cache of ammunition and weapons left from the soviet era. Russian soldiers rotate in and out through airports in Moldova.

Up until the beginning of the Russian special military operation, they had reasonable relations with both Moldova and Ukraine. Pridnestrovie quickly declared neutrality in the conflict, but Ukraine closed the border at that time. This left Moldova the only border open to imports and exports. Their parliament asked Russia for protection, as they then believed they were vulnerable to attack, but Russia made no decision on that request.

They are also vulnerable from the cut off of gas that moves from Ukraine. The population is Russian, Modavian and Ukrainian.

It seems that now this region is being eyed as an opportunity to place Russia in a position that it may have to decide to defend the region, which is around 200 miles from the Russian border. It seems there is EU pressure on both Ukraine, but mostly Moldova to take over this small region. One can expect that Moldova is being offered sticks and carrots to do this bidding. Possibly some gas from the EU if they cooperate.

It is unlikely that Russia will be distracted from its focus on its existing campaign in Ukraine and defending this country at this time would almost be impossible. We will have to see if Moldava and its citizens are ready or willing to go down this road. One can expect that region has relatives on both sides of this border, but the opportunity to force Russia to open another front or be labeled as losing something is more important than the lives of some collateral damage in this ongoing geopolitical war. 

EU uses gas as political weapon against itself?

 OR IS IT SYMBOLISM OVER SUBSTANCE?

EU IS STILL BUYING RUSSIAN GAS WITH A NEW NAME

Yesterday was a new low in EU politics as Ukraine, with the blessing of Brussels and Washington, cut the supply of gas that comes through Ukraine from Russia. This move is advertised as a step to hurt Russia financially, much like a prisoner who goes on a hunger strike to hurt their jailers, but no one is going to force feed the EU Russian gas, they may very well be successful in committing financial suicide.

The crisis will be especially severe for Hungary, Slovakia, Moldova and Romania who get the majority of their gas through Ukraine. No secret that there is plenty of political pressure on Hungary and Slovakia to submit to Brussels edicts on Ukraine and other social issues. There is also political pressure on Moldova to become part of EU and NATO and soon to militarily invade Transistia. Of course, only Russia would use gas as a political weapon in the middle of winter, except that they have not.

The reality is that the U.S. wants the EU to buy LNG gas from the U.S. at a far higher price than it cost from Russia. Will this cause a rise in the price of energy in the U.S.? Some believe that all those manufacturing businesses closing in Germany will soon emigrate to the U.S., while cheap energy is important it is not the only factor in where a business locates. So far the loss of jobs and business in the EU is being taken by, you guessed it, China. The low cost manufacturing giant is willing and able to fulfill any vacuum created by the west's misplaced political moves.

As for gas from Russia, if it is refined and sold by a third party, it is no longer Russian gas, but some other kind of gas, but at a much higher price. That is the reality of much of the gas that is currently being sold to the EU, just Russian gas with another label, and at a higher price. We must marvel at the wisdom of the current leadership in the EU. 

While they can now proclaim how they are hobbling Russia's ability to wage war, they are in effect hobbling their own ability to be prosperous and inevitably their own ability to wage war. In the meantime many of citizens, who do not live in the big cities, will need to start deforesting the continent to keep warm this winter.

Russia's strategy clear, Attrition, both Ukraine and NATO.

 BRIDGES OVER DNIEPER TELL IT ALL

WHO CAN ENDURE MORE SUFFERING?

While we continually hear rumors of peace negotiations and that Trump will end the war in a short time, the reality is cleary much different. After the initial invasion in 2022 and the failed peace talks in Istanbul, Russia reset its strategy that is now clear and focused. It has not changed and it is not likely to change in the near future. It is a strategy of attrition of men supplies, equipment and money coupled with the results of misguided attempts to damage Russia by cutting off energy to Europe.

While many are still delusional in defeating Russia, the reality is the clock is in Russia's favor. Russia is well aware of their history in defeating foreign enemies and NATO is the enemy of Russia and NATO expansion to contain and encircle Russia has been planned and implemented for 30 years.

The great plains of Ukraine have been a treacherous and disastrous 800 miles for foreign armies, from Napoleon to Hitler and now NATO. Logistics is always a serious consideration in war, if you cannot supply your army, it will be defeated in short order.  While many have stated that Russia's slow advance indicates that it is weak and unable to make much progress in occupying Ukraine.  The reality is that Russia wants to fight this war close to its border, its logistics are short and uncomplicated. It has always been aware that it could become an all out NATO war and it would force the enemy to move men and materials over 800 miles to be at the Russian border.

A clear affirmation of this strategy are the railroad and highway bridges over the Dnieper river, a huge river something like the Mississippi. Russia could have removed these bridges early in the war and caused great logistical problems for NATO's supply to Ukraine, yet they never touched these bridges, as if to say keep sending all that wealth and treasure and we will make it a huge scrap pile in eastern Ukraine, close to our supplies.

Some claim that they kept the bridges to be able to enter western Ukraine, but the reality is that then Ukraine would destroy the bridges to keep the Russia in the east. Russia has never desired to occupy western Ukraine and that is still the case. 

The plan is attrition to the point of an inability to resist. Ukraine's manpower is near that point, but they are encouraged to keep fighting and lower the recruitment age, but it is futile, the longer it goes on the weaker Ukraine will become.

As for NATO, the smaller nations have already indicated that their cupboards are bare of available weapons to send. Every current government on the continent is about to be replaced and their energy shortages are having a decided negative effect on their economies. Is NATO expansion worth suicidal economic warfare? While Washington believes that Europe may be expendables in the geopolitical battle against Russia, do the citizens of Europe agree?

While to now Russian citizens have not had to endure too much discomfort, but if it should need to, I expect that the majority of Russians will out endure the west, they are self sufficient in food and energy and have a history of great endurance against all odds. 

Again, would Ukraine have been better off as a neutral nation able to trade freely with the west and east? Would Europe be in a better place without this conflict and be able to access energy with long term contracts at under market prices as they did before the war? Is the United States in a better place in the world than it was before the Ukraine project?

It is now all about face saving and damaging Russia without regard to any of those realities. The answer to all the above questions is NO. Maybe escalation is all that is needed, after this $Trillion dollar war in expended wealth and lost prosperity will another Trillion bring success? I expect it is time for everyone to start asking those questions, is face saving for the bureaucrats worth all this death and destruction?

2024 problems now move to 2025

 WILL 2025 BE THE YEAR OF CONCLUSIONS?

CAN THE PRESENT CHAOS BE SUSTAINED FOR ANOTHER YEAR?

2025 is a big number, especially when you have witnessed 79 much smaller numbers. I suspect that many will agree the world has become much more chaotic and unpredictable. Maybe 2025 will witness some resolutions or conclusions to problems underway. 

The Ukraine fiasco appears to be on its way to some sort of conclusion, maybe not from some actual willingness of the combatants, but by the exhaustion of the whole affair. The Ukrainians are running out of manpower, NATO is running out of equipment and wherewithal and the Russians want to move on to other long range endeavours.  The time is soon ripe for a settlement, but it must be a permanent sustainable settlement, not a band aid to be ripped off later. It will require humility and real objective diplomacy, maybe necessity will make that happen.

Things are dire in the middle east, but again there are signs of exhaustion, which may lead to some sort of resolution, but I doubt that any of it will be concluded in 2025, it is too deep, too severe, too much hate and animosity, very little good will.

The other pressing question is the emergence of the multipolar world that wants to break free from control of the existing order. Again, that existing order has been powered by unlimited amounts of dollar creation that has fueled this quest for global control. It is also exhausted, whether apparent as yet or not, it is unsustainable.  The question is, can the transition to a multipolar world be accomplished peacefully, with mutual respect and co-existanstance or must it be settled in the age old fashion of mutual destruction. I doubt if this transition will be completely accomplished in 2025. 

As always, we must hope for the best, but prepare for the worst. There are some signs of hope, at present that is all we have, a hope for a better year.