REPOST: Shlomo Levin, “Lucky Denmark isn’t Israel or this might be called Genocide”
Why I’m Reposting
A second? repost from Daniel Clarke-Serret’s Substack/channel, now featuring many writers, Guerre and Shalom.
I often wonder what the world would be like if they obsessed over any country as much as they do Israel. Instead, I don’t know a damn thing about Denmark. And that’s fine. I have no reason to obsess over the history of some random country. And I certainly have no reason to yell at random Danish people about their history.
Read the work by an ex-rabbi below or here: https://danielclarkeserret.substack.com/p/lucky-denmark-isnt-israel-or-this
A man rides by on a quad bike past a row of Greenlandic national flags in Nuuk, Greenland, Wednesday, Jan. 14, 2026. (AP Photo/Evgeniy Maloletka).
Lucky Denmark isn’t Israel or this might be called Genocide
A devastating report on a “nice Nordic social democratic country”.
Shlomo Levin; Aug 31, 2026
In a devastating piece of (exclusive) reportage for Guerre and Shalom, our resident International Law expert Shlomo Levin considers whether Denmark is guilty of genocide. His research is meticulous. His use of quotes inspired. It deserves to be shared in every European capital and every international organisation. It won't be. - Daniel Clarke-Serret (editor)
In the 1960s and 1970s, Denmark engaged in a policy of forced contraception of indigenous Greenlandic women, a former colony over which Denmark still ruled. Doctors inserted IUDs into women without their consent or knowledge, in some cases causing a permanent inability to bear children. Even in the 90s and 2000’s, gynecologists were still finding IUDs Greenland women didn’t know they had.
Greenland’s population in 1970 was less than 50,000, as compared to Denmark’s close to 5 million. This means Greenland had only about 9000 women of prime reproductive age. But Denmark was interested in bringing the indigenous Greenlanders into the modern world, which was expensive, and believed less population would make it easier to bring the local standard of living closer to Europe’s. Greenland women were also having many of their children out of wedlock, which the Danish government disapproved of. In 1969, only around 1500 babies were born in Greenland, but authorities in Copenhagen decided that even that relatively small number was simply too much.
So Denmark embarked on a campaign of having IUDs inserted without women’s knowledge or consent. IUDs were inserted into about half of all eligible women, and births correspondingly fell by more than half, falling to a low of 638 in 1974.
In recent decades there has been a realization that this conduct was wrong. Greenland appointed a group of four experts to investigate legal responsibility, and on August 28th they submitted their report.
The four of them had no trouble agreeing that forced sterilization is contrary to human rights. For that, Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen had already gone to Nuuk and issued a formal apology. But there was another, more delicate issue for them to address.
Article II of the Genocide Convention, which Denmark ratified in 1951, states: ‘Genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such. . . Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group.’ Could Denmark therefore be guilty of genocide?
Despite Israel’s stated military aim to defeat Hamas and release the hostages, international law indicates that a state can act with genocidal intent while at the same time pursuing additional goals.- 2024 Report from Amnesty International concluding the Gaza war was genocide.
Different underlying motives do not displace genocidal intent. . .genocidal intent may exist simultaneously with other, ulterior motives.- Report of the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Palestinian territories occupied since 1967, Francesca Albanese, Oct. 1 2024.
The four person group divided so strongly on the issue of genocide that they divided in half, submitting two separate reports. One of the reports stated unequivocally that Denmark is not guilty of genocide, the reason being that for the government of Denmark, the primary motive for the IUD campaign was to reduce the population size in order to raise the standard of living. Even though the campaign was likely also motivated by racist views of Greenland’s indigenous culture and a desire to transform indigenous Greenlanders into becoming like Europeans, the fact that one purpose of the policy was economic means that other motives need not be considered and therefore there was no genocidal intent.
A State may be responsible for the commission of genocide through an organ whose conduct is attributable to that State. . . As agents of the State of Israel, their acts were attributable to the State of Israel. The Commission thus concluded that the State of Israel is responsible for the commission of genocide - United Nations Independent Commission of Inquiry Report, Aug. 2025
The two-person report also concedes that individual doctors may well have wanted to limit Greenlanders ability to have children for racist rather than economic reasons. But it argues this would simply have been the private motivation of these particular doctors. Even though they were working on behalf of the government, their individual, private motivations can in no way be attributed to the state.
There is no need to wait for the ICJ to declare it a genocide - Navi Pillay, Chair of the three person UN Commission of Inquiry on the Occupied Palestinian Territory
The other report, issued by the remaining two people, who broke off from the original working group, did not rule out the possibility that the campaign of forced sterilization constituted genocide. However, they decided that making that determination is beyond their competence as they are only a group of experts. “A final decision on the question of genocide remains complex and can only be made by a court with the jurisdiction, authority and resources to convene and review all available evidence,” they wrote.
‘It is our duty to bear witness to the ongoing carnage and to name it for what it is: genocide’- Amnesty International Israel/ Palestine researcher Budour Hassan, December 2024.
Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen has been silent on the question of genocide. In her official statement about the recent report, she acknowledges that the forced sterilization represents a ‘dark chapter from the past’ and apologized for, ‘the injustice of being subjected to systematic discrimination because they are Greenlanders.’ But she says absolutely nothing about genocide. It therefore seems that in her view, it is not important whether the term genocide accurately describes the conduct in question or not.
“It is time Palestine took its place among the free nations of the world, that it could pursue self-determination, self-governance, fulfil its obligations and avail of its rights under the UN Charter”- Irish Prime Minister Simon Harris, May 2024.
“The State of Palestine hereby declares that it accepts with immediate effect the competence of the International Court of Justice for the settlement of all disputes”- Palestinian submission to the ICJ
Opposition parties in Greenland want to bring Denmark before the International Court of Justice for a formal finding of whether the forced sterilizations do constitute genocide. However, there is a problem: Greenland lacks the standing to do this.
Up until 1953, Greenland was a Danish colony. At that time, it was incorporated into Denmark, giving Greenland residents full citizenship and voting rights. In 1979 Greenland received home rule, which gave it control over most internal affairs. Finally, in 2009, Greenland became self-governing, which included recognition that Greenlanders are a people entitled to self-determination under international law. Greenland has its own parliament, and the self-governing arrangement refers to Greenland and Denmark as equal partners.
But even though it is entitled to self-determination, Greenland is still not a state. That means it cannot be admitted to the United Nations, and it cannot initiate proceedings at the International Court of Justice. This conveniently allows Denmark to decide whether its forced sterilization program can be judged by the ICJ, regardless of Greenland’s wishes.
So was Denmark guilty of genocide according to international law? Under the standards applied to Israel, quite possibly. But why would anyone expect those same standards to be applied to a nice, European country like Denmark as well?
Thoughts?
Did you know Greenland, which showed interest in becoming a state decades before Palestine, only obtained self-governance in 2009??? And it’s both still not a state nor a UN Member?! I had no idea.
The article deliberately weaves the carelessness of “anti-Israel” folk announcing genocide in Gaza to the facts of Danish past. It does little to discuss how the genocide claims lodged at Israel began on Oct 7, while Palestinians were still terrorizing civilians. To this day too few Jewish groups comment on how the death toll on Oct 7 was more than ¾ civilians, so any case where ‘genocide = targetting civilians’ would inherently apply harder to Palestinians attacking Jews than the inevitable response. It also doesn’t compare the Palestinians love of “marydrom” to any values any non-Islamist groups have.
At the end of the day, nobody expects parallelism or ethics when discussing Israel. We expect obsession.
