2021’s Greenlandic Election

Thumbnail of US owned Thule Airbase, Greenland, 2005, Courtesy of Wikipedia Commons

2021 Greenlandic Election: Inuit Ataqatigiit's victory ends hope for the Kvanefjeld mining project amid debate at home and great power consternation abroad

After a snap election on the 6 April Greenland’s Inuit Ataqatigiit has emerged as the largest party within its proportionally representative parliament, securing 37 per cent of the vote and subsequently winning 12 of the 31 seats. While they have yet to form a governing coalition, the victory is being taken as a vote to halt construction of the controversial Kvanefjeld mine and may reflect wider concerns from voters over the impact of mining.

The Kvanefjeld Mining project: A controversial case

The Kvanefjeld mining project has already had $100 million invested into it by Australian company Greenland Minerals and Energy (GME) who acquired the project in 2007.Overall investment was expected to eventually reach $1.36 billion. The mine sits on one of the largest rare-earth deposits in the world, containing 1 billion tonnes of mineralized ore with both rare earths and uranium present in significant quantities. Mining would be multi-element focussed, mining several key rare-earth elements as well as uranium.

Alongside the major economic boost to Greenlands income this would provide, given its potential to become the most significant rare earths mine in the western world, helping Greenland diversify its economy away from fishing and Danish subsidies. It was expected to provide 1,171 construction jobs, and 787 operational jobs in Greenland during its lifetime that would help alleviate the high unemployment rates and “urgent need” for new mining jobs. However, the project was polarizing among Greenlanders due to its potential to pollute the surrounding environment, home to Greenlands only agricultural region, particularly with radioactive waste. 

Election aftermath: The mine “won’t happen”

The snap election had been called after growing factional rivalry within the government over the Kvanefjeld mining project and independence had seen the Siumut-led coalition collapse. The subsequent election was almost entirely dominated by the Kvanefjeld question politically and among the electorate. Siumut, Greenland’s traditionally dominant party, supported the mine for its economic benefits and argued that to backtrack on its construction would risk scaring future mining investors away. Inuit Ataqatigiit meanwhile cited their opposition to Kvanefjeld based on concerns over its environmental waste, particularly as radioactive material would be a by-product.

It is important to note that unlike suggestions from some coverage, Inuit Ataqatigiit  are not opposed to non-uranium mining projects, the economic benefits are appreciated. Kvanefjeld however was particularly controversial due to its location and as the party has a zero-tolerance policy for uranium-related mining. Múte B. Egede the leader of Inuit Ataqatigiit said of his party’s success regarding the mine that “the people have spoken… It won’t happen”. The project is expected to soon be halted.

Domestic Impact: Victory for the environment?

Domestically the news is a complicated victory for environmental groups. While the development of a polluting mine that would have increased Greenland’s carbon dioxide emissions by 45 per cent and harmed its sole agricultural region has been halted, and greater scrutiny of environmental protections is firmly on the public agenda. This is nuanced by the fact that climate change is detrimentally affecting the Arctic environment. Trying to preserve this environment from a mine who could help alleviate the expected annual shortages of rare earths expected by 2030 due to rapidly increasing demand; which are key to the manufacturing of green energy infrastructure and ecological-saving technology that might aid halting the Arctics deterioration, is potentially counterproductive.

Mixed news for independence hopes

Moreover, the mine was considered a major milestone for the autonomous island’s independence movement from Denmark. The mine's financial proceeds, an expected $235 million a year, were expected to significantly aid in stabilizing Greenland’s imbalanced fishing-heavy and subsidies reliant economy and so aid its eventual hoped-for decoupling from Denmark. This aim is something that Inuit Ataqatigiit are advocates for, though through measured steps.

As such the halting of the mine will certainly put back any hoped for independence date, though such a delay may create tensions politically among their likely coalition partners who wish to push for independence at pace, especially as 2021 marks a special date for such independence supporters. It is the 300th anniversary of Hans Egede claiming Greenland for Denmark. Balancing the push towards independence, and their position on Kvanefjeld may be a hard square to circle.   

However, some critics highlight that it was doubtful whether Kvanefjeld, or indeed mining alone, could resolve Greenland’s balance of payments issues, and that its pollution and presence might have negatively impacted the growth of the tourism industry, which can act as an alternative lucrative cornerstone alongside mining to ready Greenland’s economy for independence.

The debate going forward among independence supporters then will now need to revolve around the extent they see mining as playing a key role towards their goal and what might be the alternatives. For Inuit Ataqatigiit, given GME’s rapid stock drop of 44 per cent after the election result, it will be necessary to reassure shaken mining investors that Greenland is against dirty mining, but not all mining, lest they lose one of their most viable potential cornerstones for economic independence.

Foreign Impact: A major geopolitical setback for the “great” powers

Geopolitically, Greenland’s election is a blow to the growing competition between China and the ‘West’. For China, Greenland forms a key part of its political-economic Polar Silk Road ambition. The region, and Greenland particularly, represents a significant source of rare earths, which China has a growing demand for. In a move to alleviate this Beijing in 2017 became GME’s top investor. Very easily the Australian mine could have become a Beijing operated one. Indeed, there were plans for Kvanefjeld to have its rare earths and uranium shipped directly to China for refining.

For the ‘West’ the result has dashed immediate hopes of a Greenland centred alternative to China’s rare earth monopoly, controlling as it does 90 per cent of global rare earth supply. Greater environmental scrutiny and focus from Greenland’s government will slow down the rate and number of potential mining projects in the country making Greenland’s utilization as a significant secure source of rare earths less feasible at a time when shortages are expected and China is willing to threaten and act, to restrict the global supply of such an integral material. Rare earth elements are key for nearly all major modern civilian and military technologies. For the near future then at the very least, Greenland’s domestic politics will command global attention.