iiinova — where your digital self keeps evolving

If this is a repackaging of the 1941 deal, let’s hope it also includes Article 1: acknowledgment of sovereignty and Article 9: that the US will respect all Greenlandic laws, regulations and traditions The deal is expected to be signed next week, so stay tuned for more…

020

Trump claims that this is a ‘forever deal’ - once again echoing the 1941 treaty where Article 10 states that both parties need to agree to suspend the treaty, giving the US a de facto veto

121

Trump also says that he can now block all investments from adversaries But the US has de facto been able to do that for years by applying pressure on the Danish government to stop investments and projects by Chinese companies A new law in 2019 even strengthened DK’s ability to block investments

The 1951 defence treaty between the US and Denmark, and the 2004 ratification of the deal with Greenland as signatory, acknowledged that Denmark at least needed to be consulted before new military facilities could be built This might not be new then, just a reversal to an older deal

Article 2 of the 1941 treaty states that the US can put up military bases without consulting either Denmark or Greenland first Trump is now saying that the new deal allows him to do exactly that

In 1941, while Denmark is occupied by the Germans, Danish Ambassador to the US Henrik Kauffman strikes a much contested deal with the Americans without consulting the Danish government first. The Danes never approved the deal, but the Americans never cared - the deal was simply too good

Trump declares victory in historic deal with Greenland as he secures 'permanent' US military rights

‼️ A deal has been reached between Greenland, Denmark and the US ‼️ Very few details so far on the specifics, but it sounds oddly similar to the 1941 defence treaty between Denmark and the US… Some quick reflections below🧵

foxnews.com

Donald Trump struck a sweeping deal with Denmark and Greenland granting the U.S. permanent military basing rights on the strategically vital Arctic island.

186

8/8 If we don't capitalise on this, we end up a rule-taker on the emerging European security architecture that will shape the next decade - and we all remember how being a European "rule-taker" tends to play with the public...

000

7/8 This is a moment for the UK to engage productively with the EU and wider European allies, without it being about the UK-EU reset. This could help earn back political trust lost in the past decade, which in turn would help the rest

100

6/8 Two big new ideas were proposed: a European "Article 4" - one state's alarm triggers EU-wide... meetings? - and a new European Security Council. Neither is fleshed out yet, so hopefully a real chance for the UK to help shape what it looks like

100

5/8 Second mention was on defence. Von der Leyen and Kallas are pitching a new European Security Strategy, deliberately broader than the EU's own membership, and we were invited to the table. In fact, we are assumed part of the conversation, even if we don't always seem to be making the most of it

100

4/8 The UK did get named twice in the speech (both times after Canada and others, but we will take it). On AI: von der Leyen wants to "team up on model evaluation, verification, early warning, AI security and much more". We still have real credibility here, so one to really build on

100

3/8 It will be well worth watching what Carney says tomorrow. But this is exciting - something is stirring in Bruxelles! It has a bit of everything; limiting overreliance on the US, Carney's 'Middle Power' agenda; Europe reclaiming an identity (?)

200

2/8 Nobody knows what this new category means, but it raises the question: if Canada can be an "associate member," who's next? Ukraine, Norway... the UK? Is this step one of the rumoured "EU outer ring" architecture? Or just symbolic talk, no action?

100

State of the Union 2026: A new security forum, a shift to climate adaption — and an offer to Ottawa

While we're still nursing our Brexit wounds arguing about fish, Canada just sprinted past us and was offered the first-ever "associate membership" of the EU. Where does that leave the UK? (1/8)🧵

politico.eu

European Commission president makes unprecedented offer to Ottawa, with Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney in attendance.

153

Reposted by Sofie Pultz

Harry QP @harryqp.bsky.social · 30/06/2026

1/ Commentators seeking to define what a Burnham premiership might look like focus on "Manchesterism: without analysing the constraints that Burnham will face as Prime Minister that he didn’t as Mayor. open.substack.com/pub/harryqui...

open.substack.com

The realist case for progressive political leadership

How Andy Burnham can overcome political and policy constraints to deliver real change

143

5/6 We can't solve the problem of supply chain integration by just producing more at home. We need to invest in the resilience of our food supply chains, and that means investing in partner countries’ climate adaptation, conflict resolution and economic development.

110

4/6 Relying on other countries isn't a bad thing in and of itself - pharma products has a foreign value add of 90%+. But those imports largely come from stable allies and are less vulnerable to climate and conflict induced supply chain shocks.

100

3/6 But the strategic case is stronger than it's ever been. Take food security as an example: 84% of the value in UK agricultural imports originates abroad with over half coming from countries exposed to water stress or political instability.

100

2/6 But multiple cuts to UK ODA has weakened the development narrative, making it easier to cut further. Without a clear strategic rationale development risks being framed as aimless charity. In a tougher geopolitical and fiscal environment, that's not a sustainable position.

100

Investing in development partnerships is also an investment in supply chain resilience and ultimately cost of living. Even without the war in Iran, our agriculture supply chains are incredibly exposed - we need international cooperation to address that 🧵(1/6) www.ippr.org/articles/the... @ippr.org

153

The government is about to host a ‘Global Partnership Conference’ – should it even bother? | IPPR

Today is the last day of the UK's Global Partnership Conference, co-hosted with South Africa. It is all about showing continued British commitment to international cooperation at a time of growing US isolationism and strain on the rules-based order. Our new blog asks - why bother? @ippr.org

ippr.org

Co-hosted with South Africa, the summit will bring together ministers, government officials, business leaders, and civil society representatives from aroun

011

Reposted by Sofie Pultz

Institute for Public Policy Research @ippr.org · 19/05/2026

📈 Child poverty risk has risen among families where all adults work full time, tripling for couple families since 2000. Work should be a route out of poverty. That means better childcare support, flexible jobs and progression for parents. Read more 🔗 www.ippr.org/articles/work-isnt-working

0814

Reposted by Sofie Pultz

Institute for Public Policy Research @ippr.org · 18/05/2026

🥔 84% of the value in UK farm purchases comes from abroad. From food to fertiliser, machinery, processing and transport. In an unstable world, UK food prices are shaped far beyond our borders. 📰 New research: www.ippr.org/articles/the-government-is-about-to-host-a-global-partnership-conference

061

Reposted by Sofie Pultz

Institute for Public Policy Research @ippr.org · 15/05/2026

💥 Wars, energy shocks, shifting alliances - the UK is exposed to a more volatile world. So what should we do now? Laura Chappell explains why the UK needs a new strategy to build resilience at home and stronger partnerships abroad. 🔗 Read more: www.ippr.org/articles/diversifying-diplomacy

031

8/8 As a first step, we propose a Partnership Delivery Office in the Cabinet Office with genuine budget, coordination, and delivery authority. An actual function that joins up domestic and international levers, keeps an overview of country partnerships and plans strategic engagement

010

7/8 The thread running through all three areas is the need to shift from reactive to proactive foreign policy. A lot of the same partners are relevant across defence, energy and AI. But Whitehall is structured to handle each separately, so the UK consistently offers less than the sum of its parts

100

6/8 AI: The UK has gaps at every level of the AI stack, and filling those gaps will take time and resources, we don’t have. Instead, we need to focus on at least one node in AI architecture and get that right. We need a deliberate partnership strategy to avoid being squeezed between the US and China

100

5/8 Energy: the net zero transition creates both vulnerability and opportunity. China dominates almost all clean tech supply chains. To secure our own energy security we should consider working with partners such as Japan, Canada, Saudi Arabia, Morocco, Brazil to diversify clean tech supply chains

100

4/8 Defence: We have committed to spending 5% of GDP on defence. But it is not just about spending more, but about spending better and investing in the right alliances. This means re-engaging in SAFE, build a northern European defence-industrial alliance, and joint nuclear deterrence with France

300

3/8 The UK must identify chokepoints in core domains that underpin long-term security and economic resilience - this report looks at defence, energy, and AI - then build partnerships to address vulnerabilities in each of them

100

2/8 'Weaponised interdependence' is at the core. States using supply chains, infrastructure and investment flows as political leverage. This is not new, but the UK is now at risk of coercion from both the US and China. We need proactive foreign policy to protect our strategic autonomy.