REAL POLITIK NO. 99
20 – 31 JANUARY 2026
Comments “ flash” on 3 major diplomatic events, only in 1.000 words by the prominent analyst, Grand Master in Diplomacy,
DR. JORGJI KOTE
1.From a great ‘apple of disaccord’ to a point of cooperation! In the afternoon of 21 January all and especially Greenland made a deep breath of relief from the nightmare of the last months. Instead of the “ bomb”of occupation, President Trump extended the “ olive branch”!
As to the reasons of this sudden political move, the greatest credits is given to the NATO Secretary General, Mark Rutte, who convinced President Trump to cancel Greenland’s occupation. Thanks to his suggestion that “ it’s not necessary to occupy in order to control a country”.
Trump’s sudden decicion was the impact of several major actors/factors, starting with the large US business community which warned Trump on the relevant immeasurable losses for investment fluxes; the prevailing majority of the US public opinion and politics on both wings were also against the military force.
The next factor is the mid-term elections on 3 November for the US Congress and Senate, with their major effects on the Trump Administration and most specifically for the presidential elections in 2028.
The efficiant diplomatic European action had also its major effects. Europeans, the British, Canadians and others exercised their best diplomacy associated with concrete political, economic and military actions, showing that they would not tolerate the violation of international law and Greenland’s sovereignty. Finally, Europe showed its ‘teeth and muscles’ with its solemn pledge that they shall make neither concessions nor lavish praises for sovereignty ad territorial integrity.
They stood resolute and ready for action, including the so-called “EU trade bazooka” nicknamed as “ economic atomic bomb”. It includes fierce EU measures against any state, including USA that imposes coertive sanctions agaist them.
This was right because the possible Greenland’s occupation would produce a very dangerous precedent. If occupied, then no other country would get up the next morning calm and secure. Thus, this great “apple of disaccord” would turn into a sharp division line which also mean the end of NATO.
As to possible scenarios for the political and military management of this crisis after the compromise on Greenland, they consist in a framework agreement that would also entail trade contracts with the USA; it would also offer exclusive rights to USA to substantially increase its presence in Greenland. It would be also coupled with updating the agreement of 1951 among USA, Denmark and Greenland, which would ban Chinese investment in Greenland.
The next scenario is an Association Agrement designed to ensure and strengthen Greenland’s autonomous status. Meanwhile, just as the British in Cyprus, the USA would also have the full-fledged right in the territories where their military basis are to be located in Greenland.
The last undesirable scenario is the US purchase, under terms and conditions to be defined among the parties when and if the time comes.
2. A bad start! As expected, the founding of the World Peace Council on 22 January in Davos has produced many objections, guesses and suspicions on its future. Therefore, this Council is turbulating rather then pacifying geopolitical waters.
Actually, to be able to see their major differences with the Council of Peace in every diplomatic aspect it is suffice to draw a retrospective comparison with the UN, the Council of Europe and the OSCE.
First, their founding was all-inclusive; it was not an outcome of a single leader; neither a “ take it or leave it” deal, as it occurs with the Council of Peace, but a product of a long process of understanding, cooperation and efforts from several diplomatic teams from participating countries and which lasted for 3 – 4 years.
So, they were not founded over night, week and month, neither in a rush as the Council of Peace.
They rely on international law, the UN resolutions, the EU directives and others.
Whereas the Council of Peace has a provisional mandate from the UN Security Council, but only for Gaza. Hence, exceeding this mandate, as it appears from the Charter of the Council of Peace, which is more like a propagandistic pampflet is a violation of international law. So, without need to dwel on other aspects Italy, Germany, France, the UK, Spain and others have declined the Council of Peace.
Besides, the above-mentioned organizations were not supplements, additions or overlapps of any other group. The opposite is occurring with the Council of Peace, which has provoked many serious suspicions; even worse, a broad public perception has been outlined that the Council is designed to overlap and even create a “private Trump’s UN”! This negative image is also reinforced by the hastened proceedings with its founding, with no prior consultations with the EU and other large states that were invited to become its part and even in a very short notice. As if to prove this negative perception, some weeks ago, President Trump announced US retreat from 66 international organizations, 31 of which belong to the UN. However, the 80 year old UN experience with its several branches worldwidfe clearly proves that one may dismantle, but it can never replace the UN.
The last fact that “sealed” the above-mentioned doubts is the eternal mandate for President Trump to chair the Council, its veto and the lack of clear rules on the role and responsibility of member states, the lack of its rotating chairmanship, as in the case of the UN, EU, NATO, the Council of Europe OSCE and others. Likewise, the fee of 1 Billion US Dollars to have a permanent place there runs against the practice of the above-mentioned organizations, where each state pays a fixed quote depending on its population size and economic standards.
3.The strange absence in Davos! It is correctly considered the absence of Prime Minister Rama in the founding ceremony of the Council of Peace in Davos, following the personal invitation from President Trump as he claims. The justification with the need to accompany his daughter, Ivanka during her visit do persuade no one. For nothing and no one could hinder MP Rama to fly to Davos and then turn back to honour Trump’s daughter that surprisingly enough went in Albania exactly on that historic day. This mysterious absence could as well hide a diplomatic “ NO”, depriving PM Rama from the golden chance to meet the Head of the White House or in other words Father Trump instead his Daughter Ivanka.
© 2026 Argumentum
