i would certainly defer to the inuit to maintain their autonomy, but, as a canadian, i know that the inuit aren't actually really that concerned about autonomy, per se. the inuit are themselves relatively recent migrants to north america, having moved there from northern russia, across the north pole, in recent decades. the ancestors of today's inuit continue to live in northern russia and are ethnically closely related to siberians and mongolians. they did not cross through beringia 20,000 years ago. but, like most indigenous groups in canada, and like their siberian and mongolian cousins, they don't have clear concepts of land ownership, nationality, statehood or property. these are nomadic hunters that "govern" themselves in tribal councils. they're like big families out in the woods without state oversight.
i would call on the united states to explain what they mean, exactly. i would suspect any polling done heavily weighted the danish colony and not the inuit groups. the inuit should be presented with a draft first, and asked to analyze it, before being asked to make a decision. i would suspect that they may have little concrete opposition, once it is explained.
what would the inuit want?
- they would want the americans to clean up their garbage
- they would want the americans to leave them alone
are the americans proposing statehood, like hawaii, or incorporation as a territory, like puerto rico? are they proposing senate seats and elections to the house of representatives, with a governor? or are they proposing virtual autonomy, with an american military occupation? because that's already the case.
i don't think that this is decision is denmark's, i think it's greenland's.
rather than cyber rattling, trump should put together a clear proposal and put it directly in front of greenlanders. it's hard for them to accept or reject a proposal that is abstract and doesn't exist.