“We are in a project that we have not seen before.” For Markos Kounalakis, who lived through the fall of the Berlin Wall and the dissolution of the Warsaw Pact, his recent moves in Greenland are not a momentary crisis. It signals a return to familiar power patterns from the Cold War era.
Today, as a researcher at Stanford University’s Hoover Institution and after decades of journalistic coverage of wars and revolutions from Moscow to Afghanistan, Kounalakis reads the “dossier” as symptomatic of a broader revision of the rules of the international order.
In “Step” he talks about the limits of the “theory of the madman”, illuminating what this new phase of competition means for countries like Greece, in an international landscape where power tends to precede institutions.
“President Trump’s ability to change his stance from one moment to the next is absolutely consistent with the overall way he negotiates,” says Mr. Markos Kounalakis.
In Davos, President Trump withdrew the military threat to Greenland. Was it an honest de-escalation or a tactical adjustment after the reactions of allies and markets?
“I think it’s very difficult to interpret President Trump. He prides himself on always being willing to change course. Therefore, a key element of his negotiation strategy is to keep his interlocutors in a state of uncertainty. We can only speculate, but his ability to change stance from one moment to the next is entirely consistent with the overall way he trades. But it remains clear that, one way or another, he wants Greenland to come under what he calls US ‘ownership’.
Has Trump’s erratic approach achieved something for the US that could not have been achieved through normal diplomacy?
“He himself is very open to the ‘madman theory’ (ie the appearance of the absurd makes threats that would not be credible seem credible). Therefore, it should not surprise any of his interlocutors. But did he win or lose something? Today the whole world is talking about Greenland. This is an issue that did not exist until he raised it himself. It already seems that the Mark Rutte he may have made some concessions, and that’s more than Trump had before. While I’m not comfortable with this strategy, nor do I consider it healthy, I can straight up say that it probably won something. The losers, of course, are the Greenlanders, as they appear to have been excluded from any negotiation. The Europeans have some benefit because they realized that they need to form a single voice. And this is dramatically absent from the European leadership as a collective body.”
What does this mean for transatlantic relations?
“Many Europeans are now questioning the role that NATO can play. President Trump has made Article 5 negotiable. This continues to cause concern among Europeans. In trade, at any time the US president can change the terms of an agreement. Thus, the transatlantic relationship, although it is based on common values and a decades-old tradition, is subject to constant renegotiation by the current American administration.”
When Washington talks about annexing allied territories, what message is it sending to Moscow and Beijing?
“I don’t think Moscow or Beijing will base their behavior on something like Greenland. Russia is already aggressive. China is using its trade policy and economic power to assert itself. We observe contradictory messages towards the big capitals. On the one hand, Trump gives the impression that he is willing to use American power more decisively than his predecessors. On the other hand, he is constantly looking for deals with him Xi Jinping and him Putin. It is, therefore, a “carrot and whip” policy. How it is interpreted depends on the perception that exists in the respective capitals.”
What does an increasingly polarized international system mean for smaller countries, such as Greece, located in strategically sensitive areas?
“To understand this new context, one has to go back to the Cold War era. The great powers become more aggressive and fearful, and the middle countries often submit to the interests of the former. It’s not a comfortable position. The Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney he aptly described it, referring to the Thucydean conception. Of course, not all countries are the same. Some have more advantages. Greece, due to its geographical position, has more power than countries such as Hungary or Montenegro. Overall, though, we’re in a phase of a project we’ve seen before, as a legendary baseball player once said.”
