Germany, Denmark and France have, I believe, began a small scale troop deployment to Greenland. That may become a flood in time as the E.U. becomes a new military alliance in the basis of converting N.A.T.O. into an opposition force of frenemies without the United States. They would obviously prefer the United States to be their military backbone to support their eastward expansion through Ukraine. In the wake of the Trump administration interest in applying the Monroe/Trump Doctrine to Greenland, the EU may begin experimental contact alliance with the Russian Federation to find security guarantees to defend Greenland against potential U.S. military annexation.
These complex and interesting strategic political shifts and counter-intuitive temporal political relationship changes are a logical development from the muddled cold-war conclusion policy of reallocating Russian ownership of Ukraine away from recovering Russia to the West. As the EU developed and N.A.T.O. expanded it had the U.S.A. in its pocket to support them and convert a friendly, emerging Russia into a rival and eventual enemy.
The U.S.-E.U. balance needed to be offset by a friendly informal alliance between the U.S. and Russia in order to render Europe and China as positive more friends or partners in frenemie relationships than enemies. It is interesting how daft the U.S. democrat party is in the entire affair without any kind of global strategic alliance difference except as backseat itches on the EU chopper they believe is headed toward global socialism.
The next world order will at least be one that can maintain a high level of defense spending for all of the participants and their respective military-industrial complexes.
The situation isn't evolving. Rather it could be said to be growing in complexity. Philosophically that is interesting. All of the elements of the Universe were made through stellar synthesis- except for those created by human or other sentient intelligence on a small scale. A philosophy of history shouldn't be analyzed with evolution as a paradigmatic factor; instead it should be made with the Universe's tendency or vector to grow in complexity.
Life is that next stage of complex structures arising from combination and recombination. That has occurred in human history as well especially noticeable from the bronze age to the present. Civilization creates more complex structures comparable to the way molecules form into larger and more complex biological units. Evolution is far too crass and undervalues the fundamental change that is complexity. If the social world doesn't destroy itself soon- hopefully not before the N.B.A. trading deadline- it too will continue to grow in complexity.
