Thin ice: could the Greenland clash kill NATO?

0:28Ryan Reynolds here for Mint Mobile. If your eyes are the windows to your soul and your glasses are the windows to your eyes, then it's pretty important to find your perfect frames. That's why at Warby Parker, we've made shopping for eyewear as easy and fun as can be. Peruse endless styles in our stores or use our app to virtually try on frames and get personalized recommendations. To find your next favorite pair of glasses, sunglasses, or contact lenses, or to locate your nearest Warby Parker store, head over to WarbyParker.com. That's WarbyParker.com.

1:05The Economist

1:12Hello and welcome to The Intelligence from The Economist. I'm Jason Palmer. And I'm Rosie Bloor. Every weekday we provide a fresh perspective on the events shaping your world.

1:27For as long as megachurches have existed, America has done a pretty good line in them. But what they're offering is changing. Our correspondent finds that fire and brimstone is out, crosses too sometimes, and a business like Manor is in. And remember when you only listened to a podcast? How very monomedia. These days you can often watch them too. We ask why the cameras have been turned on to a classically audio medium.

2:05But first...

2:11It was another extraordinary weekend. Donald Trump reiterated his determination to reach a deal for America's complete and total purchase of Greenland. And he said he'd imposed 10 % tariffs on imports from eight European countries, all of them his fellow NATO allies, who'd sent troops to support the territory. European leaders vowed not to be bullied. Denmark currently runs the autonomous territory. Its prime minister said that Europe won't be blackmailed. Speaking to the BBC, Danish MP Lars-Christian Braske described Trump's threats as a personal vendetta. You cannot sell a population. It's modern slavery.

2:56A few weeks ago, many people would have struggled to locate Greenland on a map. Now the clash over this Arctic island risks tearing apart the global order. I think this is the biggest crisis in the transatlantic relationship in either of Donald Trump's two presidencies. Much more serious than anything we've had in the past. Shashank Joshi is the Economist's defence editor. What we've seen from the European response is language like blackmail, intimidation, threats of a kind I have never seen Europeans use in this way towards the United States in recent years. And I think that that tells you about the severity of the moment that we're in.

3:42Shashank, this is the most extraordinary situation. Is anyone actually going to go to war over Greenland? I think that ongoing American economic, political, diplomatic pressure, a campaign of arm twisting, is much, much more likely than a use of force, than some sort of American assault on Greenland. But I do worry that we could see an American annexation of Greenland by declaration without forces being involved. I and a lot of the people I talk to just don't rule anything out at this stage. What we would once have considered outlandish, I think, is on the table in a way it previously was not.

4:20Just remind us why Trump says he wants Greenland. There's been a shifting set of reasons. The most recent in his public remarks was that it's important to US missile defence because of its location. And that's true, but it's been true for 60 years and it's been true without American ownership. Another one is that the Danes and Europeans cannot defend it against China and Russia, particularly over the next 10 years, which doesn't really explain why America can't help to defend it just as it does other bits of Europe. But I think underneath those stated reasons, there's also a couple of other things.

4:49A lot of analysts think that Donald Trump is also interested and attracted to the natural resources under Greenland, which are plentiful, but would require quite difficult mining. And I think more generally, there is a sense he wants to be a president who once again sees America expand on a map. That's why he raised McKinley in his inaugural address. That's why he raised Manifest Destiny. I think that does make sense, given everything we know about his psychology. Now, Shashank, you're talking about Trump potentially tearing up NATO, but there have been fights in NATO before. So just how different is it this time?

5:23You're right. There have been fights in NATO before. The most famous one is probably Turkey and its invasion of Cyprus in 1974. That brought it into direct conflict with Greek forces and Greek Cypriot forces. And Greece pulled out of NATO's integrated military command for several years after that conflict. There were also other conflicts in the Atlantic. The famous one is the Cod Wars between Britain and Iceland, skirmishing over fishing rights. American threats to Greenland are much, much more serious than any of those prior conflicts. And the fundamental reason for that, Rosie, is that America is the backbone of NATO.

6:00American military officers are woven throughout every NATO command. And without American air power and intelligence, NATO forces would find it much, much more difficult to defeat Russia in any conflict. So any dispute that threatens America's role in the alliance and European trust in America's role is existential to the alliance in a way that really nothing else has been in the entire history of this organisation. You're talking about existential threats that might happen in the future, but what about the current one? What about the war in Ukraine? How is that affected by this? You have this sort of odd situation, don't you, of Europeans deeply concerned over American blackmail.

6:41And that's not my word. That's the word of the Swedish prime minister. That's the word of the Danish prime minister by America. And at the same time, they are seeking backing from America for a coalition of the willing deployment to buttress any ceasefire deal that is agreed in Ukraine. That's a very odd situation to be in. It reflects the fact that America is indispensable to European security. And I think that's the point of this, isn't it? Which is that if America is really willing to dismember one ally, that is Denmark, why would anyone believe that it will come to the aid of another ally if it is attacked by Russia as per its obligations under Article 5 of the NATO charter?

7:21And so I think faith in Article 5 had been ebbing anyway. Trump is not the sort of person who takes these alliances as sacred obligations in the way Joe Biden probably would have done. These are, I don't want to say nails in the coffin of NATO on Article 5, That would be far too strong, I think, at this stage. But I think that this is profoundly eroding what diminished trust there was in Article 5, even prior to this latest assault on Greenland and on Europe. Is it possible that Trump will really risk eroding NATO in this way? America depends on Europe. It depends on NATO. It depends on that alliance too.

7:59There's a rational way of looking at this, of course, which is that Europe is vital to the United States, not just economically, not just politically, but actually just militarily. Just take the example of an incident we discussed on this show, which was the American seizure of the Bella One, a Venezuelan linked oil tanker in the waters of Iceland. How did America seize that tanker? It didn't teleport to the middle of the North Atlantic by magic. It flew a lot of its forces to bases and airfields in the United Kingdom. And by the way, do you know who else supported that operation? It was Denmark.

8:29Look at the bases in Europe that America depends on to project power throughout Africa, throughout the Middle East. Look at the immense importance of Rammstein Air Base in Germany, which is this gigantic logistical hub. It's a medical hub for American services. That's a rational way of looking at this. Of course, if you're within the administration, what you might think is, well, Europeans are going to fold. They're going to cave. They depend on us. None of this is really at risk. And I think there's probably a subset of advisors in the administration, though not necessarily the most influential, who think if this does cause a crisis in NATO and it does cause the alliance to splinter or fragment, then some would say in the Trump administration, that's no bad thing.

9:11And if that happens, if NATO crumbles, where does that leave the Europeans? We've been through this so many times, haven't we, over the last couple of years with every crisis. I won't repeat all the ways in which Europe depends on America. Listeners probably know them by now. Intelligence, air support, logistics, aerial refueling tankers, senior military officers in command posts, et cetera, et cetera. What I will say is that I think Europeans are really looking at this issue hard. Without America, Europe has a very, very serious problem. And it's not a problem you can just throw money at. It's a problem that would probably take years to completely fix and plug all those holes left by America.

9:50And I think that knowledge is going to lead Europeans to take a cautious approach. But cautious does not mean supine. And I think we are going to see them hit back. We are already seeing some pretty tough language from Europe here. So where does this end, Shashank? Is NATO over? No, I firmly believe it's not over. Look, this is the biggest, the oldest, the most successful continuous alliance around anywhere today on the planet. It's just too big, complex and important to dissolve at the whims of one man in this way. Of course, he could walk out. Of course, that would do profound damage to it. But I think that actually this cause he is on, this isn't like Venezuela.

10:28This isn't like bombing Iran. The idea of extorting Europeans over Greenland, let alone the idea of invading and attacking it by force, that is extremely unpopular in the United States. It is opposed by a number of people in Congress, including Republicans who have been pretty, let's be honest here spineless on a great number of other issues where Trump has pushed the boundaries of the law or has pushed the boundaries of congressional opposition. And I think that there will be lots of advisors saying to him, by all means, Mr. President, use your leverage, threaten the Europeans. But to actually act on this, that would be lunacy because we would face profound consequences on everything from trade, retaliation to implications for tech companies to our access to bases in Europe.

11:15And I think that that is not quite where the United States is willing to go just yet. But Europe has to contemplate that world now. This is the most serious crisis we've faced in a long, long time. It's more serious than that moment where J.D. Vance lectured Europeans at Munich last year. This, I think, feels very different. And that's why you're seeing European leaders stand up and speak out in a way that they haven't in the past. But look, whatever happens, I think that Trump's capricious approach to these issues, his continued attacks on Europe, mean that Europeans realise even if this issue is resolved, they must move much, much more quickly, much more seriously to a vision of European defence that can exist with much less America in it.

12:02Shashank, thank you very much. Thank you so much, Rosie.

12:25www.mintmobile.com Up front payment of$45 for three month plan, equivalent to$15 per month required. Intro rate first three months only, then full price plan options available. Taxes and fees extra. See full terms at mintmobile.com. Taking care of your eyes shouldn't be a hassle. That's why Warby Parker is a one-stop shop for all your vision needs. Our prescription glasses and sunglasses are expertly crafted and unexpectedly affordable. Stop by a nearby store or use our app to virtually try on frames and get personalized recommendations. Did we mention we offer eye exams and take vision insurance too?

13:09For everything you need to see, head to your nearest Warby Parker store or visit WarbyParker.com today. That's WarbyParker.com.

13:23You guys all look fantastic. Look at your neighbor and say you look fantastic tonight. At a converted basketball stadium in Houston, 45 ,000 people come together each week. Rebecca Jackson is our Southern correspondent. When you walk through the hall, instead of concession stands like there would be at a sports game, there are donation boxes. As you get closer, you can hear a thumping bass from the music inside. These people are not turning up to watch their sporting heroes. They're actually coming to pray. Lakewood is America's biggest church. And during their Christmas Eve service, smoke machines covered the stage in a cozy fog, and a man sang a gospel rendition of Silent Night in Spanish.

14:19Thousands of people filled the bleachers, many standing, waving their arms, some crying. Researchers have found that services like this can leave people feeling like they're high on drugs. And while most American churches are struggling to fill pews, these megachurches are only getting bigger. We're also going to receive communion. So as a Florida boy myself, I certainly remember the megachurch phenomenon. But why are they doing so well these days? What makes these churches so different from an average American church is that they now more than ever have this sort of Hollywood-style production.

14:55They have mesmerizing crowds. A megachurch now is defined by having 2 ,000 or more people. And the average megachurch has 4 ,000 people a week. So Lakewood is definitely on the larger side. These churches thrive throughout the South and have for many years. But during the pandemic, when people moved into the suburbs of the Sunbelt cities, they became even more successful. When small churches shut down during lockdowns, the big ones were able to absorb their congregants. They were already live streaming services and knew pretty well how to take online donations. The megachurch business model is all about growth.

15:30One researcher told me that at any given megachurch service, Roughly a sixth of the people there are newcomers. Some churches are now franchising. Many of them are renting theaters or high school gyms that are empty on weekend mornings. And lots of them are buying new buildings. Some have 20, 30, or 40 campuses across a given city or across several states. The expansion has turned church into something much more than a Sunday service. I think it's interesting that along the way there, you used the phrase business model. When I visited Lakewood in Houston, and actually also other megachurches, mostly around the Atlanta area, I was struck by how much these places felt like a business.

16:10The main sermon on a Sunday morning is from the senior pastor who often feels like a CEO giving a TED Talk. The Hartford Institute for Religious Research, which studies megachurches, found that the average megachurch in America, their annual revenue rose by 25 % between 2020 and 2025. and nearly all of that came from congregant donations. How the churches spend their money is a little bit more mysterious. On this survey, Hartford found that they spent about half their cash on staff salaries, just over a third on building maintenance and programming, and only a tenth on charity. But beyond what they choose to disclose, their finances are really opaque.

16:49Federal tax law exempts these churches from filing annual returns and shields them from any kind of regular audit. Some pastors have unusually large mansions, accept gifts like private jets and cars from their congregants, and make millions off book deals. Interestingly, about a quarter of megachurch pastors preach something called the prosperity gospel. And this is a theology that asserts that God rewards faith with material wealth. So I don't actually remember the prosperity gospel. Basically, it sounds as if a lot of these megachurches are not doing, I don't know, sort of straight down the line, say, Southern Baptist preaching.

17:26I think that's right. I mean, Jason, one of the things that will have changed since you were a kid watching these guys on television is that they're increasingly becoming non-denominational. That means that rather than tying themselves to denominations with rigid doctrines, they're building brands that are designed to be popular and flexible. And so the result is a Christianity that in some ways looks more like a crash course in self-help than an age-old faith anchored in scripture. Most megachurch pastors, for that reason, do not preach politics. Rarely do they even talk about homosexuality or abortion from the pulpit.

18:00And the idea for this is that they need to appeal to an ever-broader crowd, and they don't want to isolate potential newcomers. But at the mention there of age-old faith anchored in scripture, as you say, this is sort of new territory. What does the old guards of the religious community make of these, let's call them innovations? I think broadly the Old Guard is not happy with this, but they are also reckoning with the fact that so many Americans are flocking to these types of churches. I spoke to the head of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, and he called the prosperity gospel a direct threat to biblical Christianity and a pseudo-religion.

18:37He thinks that young people are actually going to be attracted to a much more serious Christianity and that megachurches are waning in their influence. I want to talk to you for a few moments about believing. Sitting in Lakewood on Christmas Eve, I was struck by the fact that the pastor's primary message was Don't stop believing. It was about tackling depression and giving drug rehab one more try. And it wasn't necessarily so grounded in a deeply religious message. Looking around, I was surprised to see that there was actually no cross on display. but instead at the back of the stadium above the bleachers there was a giant American flag glowing.

19:19It struck me in that moment that the biggest draw in a church like this is something much easier to follow than any of Jesus's teachings. It's the gospel of American capitalism. Rebecca thanks very much for your time. Thanks for having me on Jason.

20:11The End Tom Wainwright is The Economist's media editor. And it's listeners, or perhaps we should call them viewers, who are leading this charge. So let's wind back. This is a trend I have certainly noticed, been a part of even. Why is this pivot to video going on? I think it's all about chasing audiences. In the States, among people who consume podcasts, about three out of 10 now say that they do so mainly in video form. So if you want to reach these people, you need to have a video to go alongside your podcast. The other thing that I think podcasters like about video, they probably have mixed feelings about it, but one thing that attracts them to it is that on a platform like YouTube, it's a great discovery mechanism.

20:52It's a great way to find people who didn't previously listen to your show and perhaps people who didn't previously listen to podcasts at all. So it's a fantastic way to get access to the nearly 3 billion people who use YouTube, for example. those clips can then be cut into shareable clips on social media. And so you can catch people that way on TikTok, on Instagram, whatever it might be. So I think the key thing behind the video trend really is podcasters trying to find new ways to catch new audiences who might otherwise not have come across their show. Well, that's just finding different shops to sell your wares in.

21:26But how are the wares changing? If you think back a few years to what people would have considered an absolutely archetypal podcast, people were really thinking about long form narrative series, things like Serial, for example, maybe Slow Burn, that kind of thing. Now, I think if you picture in your mind's eye the kind of typical podcast, I think a lot of people would imagine something more like the Joe Rogan show or maybe New Heights with Travis Kelsey and his brother. In other words, famous people talking to other famous people on a sofa. It's become a lot more about interview shows. And I think the main reason for this is that doing the video to go along with those shows.

22:01It's just so much easier and cheaper. If you're doing an interview program, switching on a camera to just watch the people chatting is very easy, very cheap. If you're doing a long-form narrative investigative show, something like Serial, coming up with video backing for that whole series is a really big, expensive undertaking. You're basically making a high-quality TV documentary. So I think the move to video really favors these kind of celebrity interview-type podcasts. And it's interesting, we just had the first Golden Globe for Best Podcast and nearly all of the shortlisted entries were these interview shows.

22:34So I think video is really helping that kind of format more than any other. So insofar as podcasts are starting to look a lot more like TV, then the TV industry must be either shaking its boots or taking an interest. I think the TV industry began probably slightly looking down its nose at these cheap TV shows, but they actually increasingly are interested in snapping some of them up. Content budgets have been reined in in recent years in Hollywood, and at the same time, Streaming companies are keen to maximize what they call engagement, which basically means time spent on their platform. And so podcasts, which are really cheap to make and incredibly long in some cases, are the ideal solution to this.

23:12And it's interesting, we've got Netflix has just started showing podcasts recently, at least in the US. Fox has been buying up podcasts to show on Tubi, which is its streaming service. The transformation of the podcast into the TV show is nearly complete. I'm interested to know what long-time podcast listeners make of this, the ones who were into it when it was an audio-only medium. For my part, I listen, I don't watch. You listen to podcasts while cooking or going on a walk or what have you. A lot of these people who watch, in inverted commas, podcasts on a platform like YouTube or perhaps even Netflix aren't necessarily watching the screen the whole time.

23:47So we've got to be a bit skeptical about this. I think some people also feel that video, in some cases, can compromise audio. Podcast makers are keen to say that you can do both and there are plenty of shows that do both audio and a video version as the same thing. But I think you probably need to optimise for one or the other. And when it comes to editing, for example, it's much easier to do a tighter edit with audio because if you're chopping every other um and uh, you know, on video, you can't really do that so easily because the video becomes too choppy. The big difference though, I think, is that to come up with a show which pleases the YouTube algorithm and maybe the Netflix algorithm going forward as well, you really need to make sure that all the exciting stuff is up front in the first minute.