Dr. Hussein Al-Deek: There is ideological harmony between Trump and Smotrich in their expansionist outlook, with fundamental differences in political reality

Noman Abed: If Trump's expansionist policies are implemented, they will cause global chaos and undermine the international system based on respect for the sovereignty of states

Dr. Omar Rahhal: Trump’s statements about annexing Canada and occupying Greenland bring to mind Hitler’s statements that preceded World War II

Dr. Aql Salah: Trump, as a dealmaker, sees Canada as an opportunity to boost the US economy, which suffers from a growing deficit

Dr. Amr Hussein: Trump's statements are "media bubbles" that he usually launches, but they reflect his personality as a businessman who thinks from an economic perspective

Controversy is escalating over the statements of US President-elect Donald Trump as he approaches taking office, regarding the possibility of annexing Canada and Greenland to the United States, which would threaten global stability and put the international system to the test, while these statements bring to mind the behavior of the colonial system that sees targeting countries as an opportunity to achieve its ambitions.

In separate interviews with “I”, writers and analysts believe that Trump’s statements reflect a populist approach and expansionist tendency that has been inherent in his policies since his first term. These statements, which some have described as “demagogic”, embody Trump’s personality as a businessman who views international relations from the perspective of economic interests and deals, ignoring international law and the foundations of diplomatic relations.

Writers and analysts believe that the American political system, with its strong institutions and constitution that governs the relationship between the authorities, will prevent the implementation of these ideas. The laws that regulate major decisions, such as war and peace, depend on the approval of Congress and state institutions, which makes such statements inapplicable on the ground.

However, writers and analysts believe that these statements by Trump raise concerns among US allies, especially European countries and Canada, who see them as a threat to the international order and regional stability.

The writers and analysts point out that the intersection between the policies of Trump and some leaders of the Israeli right, such as Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich, reveals an ideological vision related to joint expansionism, even if its motives differ. While Trump seeks to achieve economic and political gains, Smotrich focuses on religious and ideological goals aimed at expanding Israel’s borders.

Writers and analysts believe that although these statements are nothing more than media slogans aimed at stirring up controversy, they also reflect a danger to international relations if the United States tries to implement similar policies.

Unrealistic ambitions of a president who lacks a strategic vision for the country

The writer, political analyst, and specialist in American affairs, Dr. Hussein Al-Deek, believes that the statements of the US President-elect, Donald Trump, about the possibility of annexing Canada or Greenland to the United States of America represent an example of populist statements that reflect Trump’s narcissistic and controversial personality.

Al-Deek describes these statements as "demagogic" and expressing the unrealistic ambitions of a president who lacks a strategic vision for the state, preferring to launch media slogans aimed at stirring up controversy.

Al-Deek points out that the United States is an institutional state governed by the constitution and law, which makes it impossible to implement these ideas proposed by Trump.

Al-Deek explains that the American political system is not subject to the desires of a populist president, as major policies, especially those related to war and peace, are based on the approval of Congress and other American institutions, not on individual decisions.

“When Trump or someone else takes office, he will clash with the legal and institutional system in the United States, which sets clear limits on any unrealistic ambitions,” Al-Deek says.

In this context, Al-Deek points out that Canada and Denmark, to which Greenland belongs, are members of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), a military alliance established after World War II with the aim of protecting common security. This means that any attempt to attack the sovereignty of these two countries will lead to the collapse of the entire alliance and the disintegration of relations between the two sides of the Atlantic.

Al-Deek stresses that Trump's statements contradict the basic principles on which the United Nations was founded, most notably respect for the sovereignty of member states and the preservation of international peace and security.

Al-Deek believes that working to implement such ideas could lead to the destruction of the international system that has existed since the end of World War II.

“The annexation of Canada or Greenland through military force would be a flagrant violation of international law and an assault on the sovereignty of UN member states,” Al-Deek said. “These statements demonstrate Trump’s populist and narcissistic tendencies, which lack any factual or legal basis.”

Al-Deek believes that Trump's statements have sparked widespread controversy, especially in European circles, noting that these debates were not limited to responses from targeted countries such as Canada and Denmark, but extended to the rest of the European countries, which see such statements as a threat to the international system.

However, Al-Deek explains that this controversy did not reach the official American institutions or political elites, but rather remained confined to Trump’s personal statements, which reflects his populist nature and his tendency to launch slogans aimed at provoking controversy.

Regarding Trump's political future, Al-Deek believes that his second term, if he wins the elections, will not be "a bed of roses."

Al-Deek explains that there are many legal cases against Trump, such as the “hush money” case with a former American actress, which could lead to complex trials.

Al-Deek points out that Trump will face major internal obstacles, including disagreements within the Republican Party itself, as not all Republicans agree with his proposals.

"Trump will not have full support in Congress, despite Republican control. There are clear divisions within the party regarding his policies and orientations," Al-Deek says.

Al-Deek points out that there is an ideological similarity between Trump and the Israeli right, represented by Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich, especially in their expansionist outlook.

“Trump’s expansionist ideology is in harmony with Smotrich’s policies, but there are fundamental differences in the political reality of each,” says Al-Deek. “In Israel, annexation policies stem from ideological and religious premises, and enjoy the support of political and military institutions such as the Knesset and the army. In the United States, Trump’s expansionist ideas do not stem from ideology, but from personal economic and self-interested ambitions.”

Al-Deek asserts that Israel relies on “de facto authority” to implement annexation policies, while the United States lacks any institutional or international context that could support such trends.

Al-Deek warns that Trump's statements could deepen divisions between the United States and its European allies, especially in light of the complexity of relations between the two sides of the Atlantic.

“These statements add to the confusion in US foreign policy and weaken the traditional Western alliance,” Al-Deek said. “They also give the impression that the US under Trump is prepared to bypass international laws to achieve its goals, which undermines its global credibility.”

Al-Deek stresses that annexing Canada or Greenland is not just a real estate deal or an investment project that Trump can implement, but rather a matter of national sovereignty for the targeted peoples and their right to self-determination.

Al-Deek says: “It is not possible to bypass international law or the principles on which international organizations were founded, including the United Nations. Trump’s statements reflect a limited understanding of these principles and lack political realism.”

Al-Deek asserts that Trump's statements will not go beyond being populist slogans launched to stir controversy.

“The American political system, based on strong institutions and a deep state, will not allow these statements to go beyond the scope of the media,” Al-Deek says. “The international community, including America’s allies, will not tolerate any attempt to attack the sovereignty of UN member states. What Trump is doing is trying to exploit these statements to serve his personal ambitions, but they lack any realistic or political basis for implementing them.”

A mixture of the "madman" and "Jacksonian" theories.

Writer, political analyst and international relations specialist Noman Abed believes that US President-elect Donald Trump’s statements about annexing Canada and Greenland, in addition to regaining control of the Panama Canal, reflect a controversial trend that is reshaping US policy under the umbrella of what is known as the “Trump Doctrine.”

This doctrine, as Abed describes it, is based on a combination of the “madman” theories and the school of Andrew Jackson, where expansionism and populism dominate Trump’s political vision.

Abed points out that the "madman theory", which was popularized with former US President Richard Nixon, clearly applies to Trump.

Abed explains that Trump makes rash, ill-considered, and irrational decisions and statements, which confuses the United States’ allies before its opponents.

“Trump is a populist figure who always puts America first at the expense of the international order and the laws that govern relations between countries, and shows a willingness to abandon allies if he sees that as in the interest of the United States,” Abed says.

According to Abed, Trump's statements about the annexation of Canada are a clear example of his mockery of traditional allies, as Trump, during his reception of the Canadian Prime Minister before his resignation, described him as a "governor," in an implicit reference to Canada being nothing more than the "51st state" of the United States.

“Trump sees the US as providing support to Canada without compensation, and therefore the economic and political relationship between the two countries can be exploited to annex Canada in one way or another,” Abed says.

Although Trump did not threaten Canada with military force, his talk of “economic warfare” drew angry reactions from Canadian officials, with Abed noting that these statements reflect Trump’s desire to achieve economic and political gains without regard for international consequences.

Abed discusses Trump’s statements about Greenland and the Panama Canal, noting that they are part of his expansionist policy that is in line with the geopolitical interests of the United States. Abed says: “Trump sees Greenland as an opportunity to expand US influence in the Arctic and confront Russian and Chinese expansion in the region. As for the Panama Canal, Trump considers it part of the American legacy that must be restored to enhance control over global shipping lanes.”

However, Abed explains that these statements raised international concerns, especially among European countries, which saw them as a threat to the global order that has existed since the end of World War II.

Abed points out that these statements reveal a contradiction in Trump's policies, as he refuses to wage wars that cost the US treasury, but is prepared to engage in conflicts that guarantee economic and geopolitical gains.

Abed points out that there is an intellectual harmony between Trump and the Israeli far right, especially Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich.

“Trump and Smotrich share an expansionist vision, but their motivations differ,” Abed says. “While Smotrich is driven by a religious ideology that aims to realize the dream of Greater Israel, Trump is driven by purely economic interest, reflecting his vision as a businessman before he is a politician.”

He believes that Trump's statements about expanding the United States are consistent with his support for expanding the area of Israel, which was practically evident in his policies towards the occupied Syrian Golan and the West Bank, and these positions show Trump's lack of interest in international law or regional balances.

Abed believes that implementing any of these statements will lead to serious repercussions on world peace, especially since the targeted countries, such as Canada and Denmark, are members of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO).

“Such moves will dismantle the alliance and weaken traditional Western alliances, creating a vacuum that other powers, such as Russia and China, can exploit,” Abed says.

Abed warns that Trump's expansionist policies, if implemented, will create global chaos and undermine the international system built on respect for the sovereignty and rights of states.

Abed believes that these policies may exacerbate economic and political tensions, especially in the Middle East, which will be most affected by any changes in American policy.

Abed confirms that Trump's statements will remain controversial slogans aimed at achieving media and popular gains, without finding their way to practical implementation.

“The American political system, which is based on institutions and law, will prevent the implementation of such ideas, and international reactions, especially from European and Canadian allies, show that the world will not accept Trump’s populist policies that threaten the stability of the global order,” Abed says.

There is a big confusion between the presidency of states and the presidency of profitable companies.

The writer and political analyst, Dr. Omar Rahhal, confirms that Trump’s statements about the possibility of annexing Canada or occupying the island of Greenland show his lack and shallowness of culture and experience in international relations and international politics. These statements indicate his inability to separate between his trade on the one hand, and the acquisition of small and struggling companies by large and wealthy companies on the other hand, and between fully sovereign states and the prohibition of international law on the acquisition of other countries’ lands through invasion, annexation or occupation on the third hand. This confirms the great confusion between the presidency of states and the presidency of profitable companies, and between the management of peoples and the management of money.

Rahhal describes these statements as "irresponsible" and "threatening international peace and security," warning that such statements could lead to igniting the fuse of a third world war if they are implemented.

Rahhal stresses that Trump cannot be described as a statesman, but rather a “merchant,” and at best a “businessman” who views political issues from the perspective of commercial and economic deals.

"This commercial mentality and narcissistic personality that characterizes Trump makes him make ill-considered and irresponsible decisions and statements, which threatens global stability," Rahhal says.

Rahal likens Trump's approach to the actions of tyrants in history, such as Hitler, who pursued policies of expansion and aggression against neighboring countries.

"Trump's statements about annexing Canada and occupying Greenland bring to mind Hitler's invasion, occupation and aggression against weak countries that preceded World War II," Rahhal says. "These actions pose a direct threat to world peace."

Rahhal believes that the world will not accept these absurd statements, pointing out that Canada is an independent country and a member of the United Nations, and that Europe, as a traditional ally of the United States, will not allow such aggressive policies that threaten global stability.

Rahhal describes Trump's statements as "not worth the paper they were written with," stressing that American institutions, including Congress, the Pentagon, and lobby and interest groups, will obstruct the implementation of any similar moves.

Rahhal believes that Trump's continued making of strange statements, or taking decisions that would exacerbate international relations, raises the question of the president's eligibility and the extent of his ability to lead the United States of America.

However, Rahhal points out that the current Congress, in both its branches, will often conform to the president’s wishes, describing the US president, according to Article II of the US Constitution, as a “little emperor.”

Rahhal criticizes Trump's approach to foreign policy, which is based on blackmail and threats, saying: "Trump's policy relies on economic deals and the threat of sanctions and force, which increases risks and undermines international relations to the brink of the abyss."

Meanwhile, Rahal sees Trump as intellectually in tune with the policies of the Israeli far right, such as Bezalel Smotrich, on annexation and expansion, reflecting a colonial doctrine that aims to expand at the expense of others.

Rahhal points out that Trump's statements are inseparable from the ideological background and foreign policy of the United States as a country whose policy is based on hegemony and plundering the resources of peoples.

"What Trump is doing is in harmony with Smotrich's expansionist ideology," Rahhal says. "They both seek to achieve their goals through annexation and occupation, which shows the true face of the United States as a country that was colonized on the ruins of indigenous peoples."

Rahhal believes that these policies show a continuation of the American approach based on exploiting influence and imposing hegemony over other countries, although America does not need more land, as it is the world’s first power and has broad influence, but Trump seeks to enhance his personal and political interests through provocative and absurd statements.

Rahal warns that Trump's statements could cast a shadow over US foreign relations.

“These statements add more absurdity to US foreign policy and may lead to an escalation of crises with other countries, whether Canada or others,” Rahhal said. “Policies that rely on pressure and threats may exacerbate the situation and expose the world to more risks and crises in international relations, which could lead to the outbreak of war between the United States and other countries.”

Writer and political researcher Dr. Aql Salah believes that Trump's statements about annexing Canada and Greenland are not new in their content, as they are in line with his policy that he has followed since his first term, which focuses on strengthening the American economy by any means, including controlling the resources and wealth of other countries.

Salah stresses that these statements, despite their controversial nature, carry clear economic and strategic dimensions.

Salah believes that Canada represents a tempting target for Trump due to its strategic geographical location, as it is surrounded by three oceans, in addition to its enormous wealth as a source of energy, minerals and food. Canada is also one of the most advanced countries in the fields of technology and services, which makes it a suitable target for Trump's economic policies.

“Trump, as a dealmaker, sees Canada as an opportunity to boost the US economy, which is suffering from a growing deficit,” Salah says. “This deficit seems to be the main driver behind his policies that seek to control the resources of countries, just as happened in Iraq and Syria, where the US focused on controlling energy resources.”

However, Salah believes that Trump's statements about annexing Canada are not feasible on the ground, as the decision is a blatant violation of international law and an attack on Canada's sovereignty as an independent state.

Salah points out that the United States, even if it has global influence, cannot impose such policies without facing decisive international reactions.

Salah says: “These statements, despite their provocative nature, will be met with strong political resistance from the countries threatened with annexation, and will reach international bodies to determine their position. Such policies may also negatively affect trade relations between the United States and the targeted countries.”

Salah points out that there is a clear intersection between the policies of Trump and the Israeli far right, especially Smotrich, as this intersection is represented in the expansionist tendency adopted by both parties, despite the difference in their motives.

"While Trump focuses on economic goals to boost the American economy, Smotrich is motivated by religious and biblical motives that aim to achieve the dream of Greater Israel," Salah says.

Salah explains that there are three factors that encouraged the Israeli right to move forward with its expansionist policies: the arrival of far-right leaders to power in Israel, the feeling of having the power to achieve their goals without real opposition, and the implicit support provided by Trump through his policies and statements.

Salah believes that Trump's statements about annexing Canada and Greenland intersect with his previous statements about expanding Israel's area, as he confirmed months ago that Israel needs to expand geographically.

Salah believes that these statements reflect implicit support for Israel in exchange for the support of the Zionist lobby in the United States.

Salah describes Trump's statements about Canada, Panama and Greenland as "hostile and bullying", reflecting his desire to control the people and geography of other countries.

Salah says: “These statements reveal the true face of Trump’s policies, which are based on exploiting the resources of targeted countries to achieve economic gains for the United States, regardless of the humanitarian or political costs.”

Salah believes that Trump’s statements about Canada, Greenland, and the Panama Canal represent a continuation of a political pattern that relies on stirring up controversy, and highlight Trump’s tendency to expand US influence globally, in line with his economic ambitions.

Salah believes that implementing any of these statements will cause chaos in the international system and will lead to political isolation of the United States.

“The targeted countries, such as Canada, will not accept such policies and will demand firm responses from the international community,” Salah said. “The statements will also exacerbate tensions between the United States and its allies, especially in Europe and Canada.”

Salah asserts that Trump’s statements are not just polemical slogans, but rather reflect an expansionist policy aimed at strengthening American control globally. However, these statements lack a legal and legitimate basis, making them more like propaganda tools that serve Trump’s political and economic ambitions, without being applicable on the ground.

Trump's "media bubbles"

The Egyptian writer, political analyst, and specialist in international and strategic relations, Dr. Amr Hussein, believes that the statements of US President-elect Donald Trump regarding the annexation of Canada and Greenland fall within a series of "media bubbles" that he has been accustomed to launching since his first presidential term.

Hussein describes these statements as a reflection of Trump's personality as a businessman who thinks from an economic and commercial perspective, rather than an expression of a serious political orientation.

Hussein points out that Trump's statements are consistent with previous positions in which he expressed his support for expanding Israel's territory, which was practically translated through Israeli occupation policies in parts of Syria and southern Lebanon.

Hussein believes that such statements come within the framework of stirring up media and political controversy, especially before Trump takes over the reins of power in the White House.

Hussein believes that the American political system, which is governed by diplomatic controls and international relations laws, will prevent any unrealistic actions of this kind after Trump takes office.

Hussein asserts that the statements about Canada’s annexation in particular may reflect a desire for “economic annexation” rather than actual annexation, which is in line with Trump’s commercial thinking, and the statements came within the media bubbles that Trump is accustomed to practicing.

Hussein stresses that these statements by Trump will remain merely controversial slogans, used to achieve political and media gains, without any practical application on the ground.