Mexico and Canada to close the borders

🎙️GUEST COMMENTARY

Americans wishing to flee the country and Trump’s wrath may want to consider entertaining plans of doing it right now. Get your passports, pack your most essential belongings and get your affairs in order. Trump’s pursuit of other countries and regions are causing an alarm throughout the western Hemisphere at close range, and the world at long range. This is prompting Canada and Mexico to consider closing the borders to America. Other countries may follow as well. Headlines Lab has the story behind this bold move:

******************************************

Canada and Mexico would be well within their rights to shut their borders to the United States until Donald Trump is removed from office. Not as punishment. As protection.

This isn’t about tariffs or trade disputes anymore. It’s about stability, safety, and sovereignty. When a U.S. administration openly ignores international law, launches unilateral military actions, threatens allies, and treats borders as leverage instead of agreements, neighbouring countries have an obligation to protect their citizens.

Here’s why closing the borders would be justified.

First, security. When an administration shows it will bypass Congress, disregard treaties, and act first while explaining later, that creates real risk for neighbouring countries. Refugee surges, retaliation, economic shocks, and spillover instability don’t stay neatly contained inside U.S. borders. Canada and Mexico would be absorbing the consequences of decisions they did not make and cannot influence.

Second, democratic integrity. Trump has repeatedly undermined elections, the judiciary, the press, and basic rule of law. Allowing unrestricted cross-border movement, intelligence sharing, and economic dependency with a government sliding toward authoritarianism is reckless. Democracies have a duty to firewall themselves from regimes that no longer respect democratic norms.

Third, economic coercion. Trump has used tariffs, trade threats, and economic pressure as weapons against allies. Border controls would be a defensive move to prevent further economic blackmail and to force a reset based on mutual respect, not intimidation.

Fourth, public safety and human rights. Policies that target migrants, minorities, journalists, and political opponents don’t stop at the border in their effects. Canada and Mexico should not be complicit, directly or indirectly, in legitimizing or enabling an administration that treats human rights as optional.

Finally, sovereignty. Borders exist for a reason. Closing them temporarily would send a clear message: Canada and Mexico are not satellites, not bargaining chips, and not buffers for American political chaos. Cooperation requires trust. Trust has been shattered.

This wouldn’t be anti-American. It would be pro-democracy, pro-stability, and pro-citizen. The responsibility for fixing the United States belongs to Americans. Until that happens, Canada and Mexico have every right to protect themselves from a government that has shown, repeatedly, that it cannot be trusted with power.

****************************

Proud sponsor of the

And DEI

Click on the symbols above to find out how to participate.

Also, a new initiative to boycott other companies has been launched, which may interest you. Click here for details. Link: https://boycotthere.com/

Greenland, NATO, and the Limits of Alliance: What a U.S. Invasion Could Mean

Photo by Lara Jameson on Pexels.com

🎙️GUEST COMMENTARY

After the toppling of the Maduro regime in Venezuela, which was compensated with the inauguration of Delcy Rodriguez, Trump now has his focus on Greenland. Greenland has under 57,000 inhabitants, still it has some vast resources the US wants at any cost. Plus it would fulfil the prophecy of Project 2025, which would call for the entire western Hemisphere to be under US dominance, from Canada to Argentina, thus making the world a three-way global domination with China taking Asia and Africa, and Russia taking Europe. Greenland has been a focus of conflict between Trump and Denmark, which owns the country, and word has it that Trump would go much further as to take the country by force. By doing that, the consequences would be fatal: for the US as a democratic country and world superpower, for NATO (which Denmark and the US are both members) and lastly, for the US, as you will see in the next article.

Here’s how it would unfold in this commentary by Marsha Langham:

**********

In January 2026, renewed threats by the convicted felon in the White House to “take” Greenland have triggered an unprecedented legal and political crisis within NATO. For the first time, a founding member could be positioned to attack another member’s territory, and be attacked in self defence, a scenario the Alliance was never designed to handle originally

Would Article 5 Apply?

Legally, Greenland is fully covered under NATO’s Article 5, as a territory of Denmark within the North Atlantic region. In theory, an armed attack on Greenland could trigger collective defense. In practice, consensus is required in the North Atlantic Council (NAC). With the U.S. itself as the potential aggressor, formal NATO action could be blocked. Nonetheless, individual allies remain bound by the treaty to assist Denmark, whether through military aid, intelligence sharing, or sanctions. Although, Article 5 is designed for an “armed attack” with an international element, the treaty legally does not explicitly state that the attacker must be a non-member, so technically other NATO members can attack the U.S if it invades Greenland

Expected Outcomes & Responses

– Collapse of NATO? Danish PM Mette Frederiksen warned a U.S. attack would “spell the end of NATO.”

– European Defiance: Germany, France, & the UK have already reaffirmed support in “all aspects” for Danish sovereignty

– Alternative Mechanisms: Denmark could invoke the EU’s Article 42.7, requiring members to assist militarily “by all the means in their power.”

The Trump administration cites Arctic security & Greenland’s mineral resources as justification, but an invasion could paralyze NATO’s formal mechanisms, forcing European nations to consider independent defense actions against their largest ally

Domestic Legal Checks

– Impeachment: Congress could act under “high crimes & misdemeanors” for illegal aggression

– 25th Amendment: The Vice President & Cabinet could temporarily remove presidential powers if the President is deemed unable to act lawfully

– Military Duty: U.S. personnel are bound by the constitution & are obligated to disobey unlawful orders, & apprehend the felon, potentially halting an illegal war

International & Economic Pressure

– EU Mutual Assistance: Danish nationals could trigger EU obligations under the Lisbon Treaty

– Economic Isolation: Sanctions, tariffs, or expulsion of U.S. forces from Europe will happen

– Bond Market Pressure: Financial markets could penalize costly, illegal military action

– Midterm Elections: Political pressure & shifting public opinion may act as a brake

Greenland is legally protected, but an invasion by U.S. would test NATO like never before, potentially forcing a split between the U.S. & European allies with the felon falling from grace. Domestic legal action, international military support for Denmark, & economic pressures are key levers to prevent or halt such a crisis

****************************

Information on NATO can be found in this link below:

Link: https://www.nato.int/en

****************************

Proud sponsor of the

And DEI

Click on the symbols above to find out how to participate.

Also, a new initiative to boycott other companies has been launched, which may interest you. Click here for details. Link: https://boycotthere.com/