The Dictatorship

Greenlanders unite to fend off the US as Trump seeks control of the Arctic island…

Published

1 year ago

March 27, 2025

Greenlanders unite to fend off the US as Trump seeks control of the Arctic island…

NUUK, Greenland (AP) — Lisa Sólrun Christiansen gets up at 4 a.m. most days and gets to work knitting thick wool sweaters coveted by buyers around the world for their warmth and colorful patterns celebrating Greenland’s traditional Inuit culture.

Her morning routine includes a quick check of the news, but these days the ritual shatters her peace because of all the stories about U.S. President Donald Trump’s designs on her homeland.

“I get overwhelmed,’’ Christiansen said earlier this month as she looked out to sea, where impossibly blue icebergs floated just offshore.

Lisa Solron Christiansen, 57, knits a sweater holding her grand daughter Siilia, 2, at her home in Nuuk, Greenland, Thursday, March 9, 2025. (AP Photo/Evgeniy Maloletka)

The daughter of Inuit and Danish parents, Christiansen, 57, cherishes Greenland. It is a source of immense family pride that her father, an artist and teacher, designed the red-and-white Greenlandic flag.

“On his deathbed he talked a lot about the flag, and he said that the flag is not his, it’s the people’s,” she said. “And there’s one sentence I keep thinking about. He said, ‘I hope the flag will unite the Greenlandic people.’’’

Members of Inuit Ataqatigiit political party dance with national flags at a party after parliamentary elections in Nuuk, Greenland, Tuesday, March 11, 2025. (AP Photo/Evgeniy Maloletka)

A boat rides though a frozen sea inlet outside of Nuuk, Greenland, March 6, 2025. (AP Photo/Evgeniy Maloletka)

Pieces of ice float on the sea in Nuuk, Greenland, Tuesday, March 4, 2025. (AP Photo/Evgeniy Maloletka)

Military vessel HDMS Ejnar Mikkelsen of the Royal Danish Navy patrols near Nuuk, Greenland, Wednesday, March 5, 2025. (AP Photo/Evgeniy Maloletka)

Island of anxiety

Greenlanders are increasingly worried that their homeland, a self-governing region of Denmark, has become a pawn in the competition between the U.S., Russia and China as global warming opens up access to the Arctic. They fear Trump’s aim to take control of Greenland, which holds rich mineral deposits and straddles strategic air and sea routes, may block their path toward independence.

Those fears were heightened Sunday when second lady Usha Vance announced she would visit Greenland later this week to attend the national dogsled race. Separately, National Security Adviser Michael Waltz and Energy Secretary Chris Wright will visit a U.S. military base in northern Greenland.

The Trump administration’s push got even heavier on Tuesday when U.S. Vice President JD Vance shared a video saying he would join his wife Friday at the military base in Greenland.

“We’re going to check out how things are going there,” Vance said. “Speaking for President Trump, we want to reinvigorate the security of the people of Greenland because we think it’s important to protecting the security of the entire world.”

The announcements inflamed tensions sparked earlier this month when Trump reiterated his desire to annex Greenland just two days after Greenlanders elected a new parliament opposed to becoming part of the U.S. Trump even made a veiled reference to the possibility of military pressure, noting the U.S. bases in Greenland and musing that “maybe you’ll see more and more soldiers go there.”

News of the visit drew an immediate backlash from local politicians, who described it as a display of U.S. power at a time they are trying to form a government.

A crow flies over political placards for the upcoming elections in Nuuk, Greenland, Saturday, March 8, 2025. (AP Photo/Evgeniy Maloletka)

People cast their votes in parliamentary elections in Nuuk, Greenland, Tuesday, March 11, 2025. (AP Photo/Evgeniy Maloletka)

People stand in line outside a polling station to cast their vote in parliamentary elections, in Nuuk, Greenland, Tuesday, March 11, 2025. (AP Photo/Evgeniy Maloletka)

A woman casts her votes in parliamentary elections in Nuuk, Greenland, Tuesday, March 11, 2025. (AP Photo/Evgeniy Maloletka)

Electoral workers prepare to count votes during parliamentary elections in Nuuk, Greenland, Tuesday, March 11, 2025. (AP Photo/Evgeniy Maloletka)

“It must also be stated in bold that our integrity and democracy must be respected without any external interference,’’ outgoing Prime Minister Múte Boroup Egede said.

Greenland, part of Denmark since 1721, has been moving toward independence for decades. It’s a goal most Greenlanders support, though they differ on when and how that should happen. They don’t want to trade Denmark for an American overlord.

The question is whether Greenland will be allowed to control its own destiny at a time of rising international tensions when Trump sees the island as key to U.S. national security.

Greenlanders unite to fend off the US as Trump seeks control of the Arctic island (AP video by Kwiyeon Ha)

David vs. Goliath

While Greenland has limited leverage against the world’s greatest superpower, Trump made a strategic mistake by triggering a dispute with Greenland and Denmark rather than working with its NATO allies in Nuuk and Copenhagen, said Otto Svendsen, an Arctic expert at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington.

Trump’s actions, he says, have united Greenlanders and fostered a greater sense of national identity.

“You have this feeling of pride and of self-determination in Greenland that the Greenlanders are not, you know, cowed by this pressure coming from Washington,” Svendsen said. “And they’re doing everything in their power to make their voices heard.”

Denmark recognized Greenland’s right to independence at a time of its choosing under the 2009 Greenland Self-Government Act, which was approved by local voters and ratified by the Danish parliament. The right to self-determination is also enshrined in the United Nations charter, approved by the U.S. in 1945.

Passengers ride on a boat outside of Nuuk, Greenland, Thursday March 6, 2025. (AP Photo/Evgeniy Maloletka)

People listen speeches of candidates for upcoming parliamentary elections in Nuuk, Greenland, March 5, 2025. (AP Photo/Evgeniy Maloletka) — People listen speeches of candidates for upcoming parliamentary elections in Nuuk, Greenland, Tuesday, March 5, 2025. (AP Photo/Evgeniy Maloletka)

Children stand in the snow as candidate's pictures on boards are seen outside a polling station during parliamentary elections, in Nuuk, Greenland, March 11, 2025. (AP Photo/Evgeniy Maloletka) — Children stand in the snow as candidate’s pictures on boards are seen outside a polling station during parliamentary elections, in Nuuk, Greenland, Tuesday, March 11, 2025. (AP Photo/Evgeniy Maloletka)

U.S. national security

But Trump is more focused on the economic and security needs of the U.S. than the rights of smaller nations. Since returning to office in January, he has pressured Ukraine into giving the U.S. access to valuable mineral resources, threatened to reclaim the Panama Canal and suggested that Canada should become the 51st state.

Now he has turned his attention to Greenland, a territory of 56,000 people, most from indigenous Inuit backgrounds.

Greenland guards access to the Arctic at a time when melting sea ice has reignited competition for energy and mineral resources and attracted an increased Russian military presence. The Pituffik Space Base on the island’s northwest coast supports missile warning and space surveillance operations for the U.S. and NATO.

A boy throws ice into the sea in Nuuk, Greenland, Tuesday, March 11, 2025. (AP Photo/Evgeniy Maloletka)

Women carry political placards for the upcoming elections in Nuuk, Greenland, March 8, 2025. (AP Photo/Evgeniy Maloletka) — Women carry political placards for the upcoming elections in Nuuk, Greenland, Saturday, March 8, 2025. (AP Photo/Evgeniy Maloletka)

Before Trump’s re-election, Greenlanders hoped to leverage this unique position to help the country achieve independence. Now they fear it has made them vulnerable.

Cebastian Rosing, who works for a water taxi firm that offers tours around the Nuuk fjord, said he’s frustrated that Trump is trying to take over just as Greenland has begun to assert its autonomy and celebrate its Inuit origins.

“It’s so weird to defend (the idea) that our country is our country because it’s always been our country,” he said. “We’re just getting our culture back because of colonialism.”

Cebastian Rosing, 35, rides on a boat at the sea ilnet near Kapisillit village in Greenland, March 6, 2025. (AP Photo/Evgeniy Maloletka) — Cebastian Rosing, 35, rides on a boat at the sea ilnet near Kapisillit village in Greenland, Thursday, March 6, 2025. (AP Photo/Evgeniy Maloletka)

Strategic importance

It’s not that Greenlanders don’t like the U.S. They have welcomed Americans for decades.

The U.S. effectively occupied Greenland during World War II, building a string of air and naval bases.

After the war, President Harry Truman’s government offered to buy the island because of “the extreme importance of Greenland to the defense of the United States.” Denmark rejected the proposal but signed a long-term base agreement.

When Trump resurrected the proposal during his first term, it was quickly rejected by Denmark and dismissed as a headline-grabbing stunt. But now Trump is pursuing the idea with renewed energy.

During a speech earlier this month he told a joint session of Congress that the U.S. needed to take control of Greenland to protect its national security. “I think we’re going to get it,” Trump said. “One way or the other.”

Passengers walk on a pier after arriving in Kapisillit village in Greenland, March 6, 2025. (AP Photo/Evgeniy Maloletka) — Passengers walk on a pier after arriving in Kapisillit village in Greenland, Thursday, March 6, 2025. (AP Photo/Evgeniy Maloletka)

A fisherman rides on a boat though a frozen sea inlet outside of Nuuk, Greenland, Thursday, March 6, 2025. (AP Photo/Evgeniy Maloletka)

Seal heads are seen in a box at the market in Nuuk, Greenland, Friday, March 7, 2025. (AP Photo/Evgeniy Maloletka)

Sellers cut fish at the market in Nuuk, Greenland, Friday, March 7, 2025. (AP Photo/Evgeniy Maloletka)

A model in the Marshall Islands?

Even so, Trump has his admirers in Greenland.

And there is no greater fan than Jørgen Boassen. When he spoke to The Associated Press, Boassen wore a T-shirt featuring a photo of Trump with his fist in the air and blood streaming down his face after an assassination attempt last year. Underneath was the slogan, “American Badass.”

Boassen works for an organization called American Daybreak, which was founded by former Trump official Thomas Dans and promotes closer ties between the U.S. and Greenland.

The former bricklayer, who describes himself as “110%″ Inuit, has a litany of complaints about Denmark, most stemming from what he sees as mistreatment of local people during colonial rule. In particular, he cites Inuit women who say they were fitted with birth control devices without their permission during the 1970s.

Juergen Boasson, Trump's fan posting for photo in his house in Nuuk, Greenland, March 7, 2025. (AP Photo/Evgeniy Maloletka) — CORRECTS SPELLING OF NAME Jørgen Boassen, Trump’s fan posting for photo in his house in Nuuk, Greenland, Friday, March 7, 2025. (AP Photo/Evgeniy Maloletka)

Trump must act to secure America’s back door, Boassen says, because Denmark has failed to guarantee Greenland’s security.

But even he wants Greenland to be independenta U.S. ally but not the 51st state.

What he has in mind is something more like the free-association agreement the Marshall Islands negotiated with the U.S. when it became independent in 1986. That agreement recognizes the Pacific archipelago as a sovereign nation that conducts its own foreign policy but gives the U.S. control over defense and security.

“We’re in 2025,’’ Boassen said. “So I don’t believe they can come here and take over.”

Whatever happens, most Greenlanders agree that the island’s fate should be up to them, not Trump.

“We have to stand together,’’ Christiansen said, her knitting needles clicking and clacking.

Houses covered by snow are seen on the coast of a sea inlet of Nuuk, Greenland, Friday, March 7, 2025. (AP Photo/Evgeniy Maloletka)

___

This story, supported by the Pulitzer Center for Crisis Reporting, is part of an ongoing Associated Press series covering threats to democracy in Europe.

___

Associated Press writer Josh Boak in Washington contributed reporting.

The Dictatorship

How Trump’s first-year blitzkrieg stalled out

Published

21 hours ago

June 21, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Jun. 21, 2026, 6:00 AM EDT

After President Donald Trump was inaugurated in January 2025, he signed a series of executive orders designed to reshape America’s political landscape. The waves of action from the White House deluged the press, put elected Democrats off balance and left liberal groups scrambling to respond. “When you’re winning, it’s like blitzkrieg,” longtime Trump adviser Steve Bannon crowed to The Washington Post early last year. The president’s opponents, Bannon said, were “surrendering without a fight.”

By blowing up so many norms and taking on so many battles at once, the Trump administration created the very shrapnel that has slowed its efforts.

A year and a half later, what seemed like a relentless flood from the White House has weakened to a trickle. New reporting from The New York Times’ Maggie Haberman and Jonathan Swan shows that fears of overreach expressed inside the administration proved prescient; the multifront assault has proved vulnerable to counterattack — and in many ways it has been abandoned by the commander in chief. By blowing up so many norms and taking on so many battles at once, the Trump administration created the very shrapnel that has slowed its efforts. The “blitzkrieg” has stalled out.

According to Haberman and Swan, at least one senior staffer worried about a White House strategy reminiscent of Silicon Valley’s “move fast and break things” ethos. Will Scharf, the White House staff secretary and an archconservative lawyer, reportedly had misgivings about efforts within the administration to flex its muscles to further its anti-immigration agenda. Last spring, White House deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller publicly suggested that Trump could suspend habeas corpus for migrants seeking hearings challenging their detention. Later, as protests raged against Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s heavy-handed raids, internal debate bubbled up again over whether to invoke the Insurrection Act to shut down the demonstrations.

In each of these moments, Scharf drafted memos to White House chief of staff Susie Wiles explaining the ways that these aggressive moves might well backfire. (MS NOW has not independently confirmed Haberman and Swan’s reporting but has reviewed the memos that the Times published.) The memos themselves resemble anodyne briefing memos that any lawyer could produce for decision-makers. But the carefully worded drafts are a major departure from the bombastic phrasing in legal filings that we’ve come to expect from this administration.

Scharf’s memos express concerns about, as the Times put it, “actions that promised Mr. Trump quick results but kept producing costly entanglements in court.” In a memo written last October, after the president threatened to invoke the Insurrection Act to deploy the National Guard to Illinois, Scharf’s warning was remarkably direct. He wrote that while the act provides broad powers to the president, “it is likely that any invocation of the Act would result in vigorous litigation potentially obviating any advantage to be gained in terms of the flexibility that it would provide to the President.”

Trump neither suspended habeas nor invoked the Insurrection Act. But time has shown that Scharf and other skeptics were right to worry about how bold moves could become self-inflicted wounds. The administration already has racked up a wild number of court losses on many of its most daring gambits, and dozens of cases remain open. The departures of thousands of experienced Justice Department lawyers certainly hasn’t helped matters, nor have the unconvincing slapdash efforts to twist the law’s meaning to fit the administration’s preferred narratives.

As the unpopularity of the Trump agenda grew, already bumpy terrain became a major slog, especially after the president launched a war against Iran in late February. The conflict has theoretically ended, but there are no details on what, if anything, has been gained, aside from a clear legacy of higher prices. Focus on the war has likewise sapped any political capital that the White House may have hoped to spend in preserving Republican majorities in Congress in this fall’s midterms.

Any remaining momentum in reshaping the government has ground to a near halt with the president’s focus on his own vanity projects.

Any remaining momentum in reshaping the government has ground to a near halt with the president’s focus on his own vanity projects. Although they’re still corrupt overreaches in their own way, Trump’s plans to gild equine statues around Washington and paint the bottom of the reflecting pool blue don’t rise to the same level as deploying the U.S. Army against protesters. As My colleague Zeeshan Aleem recently noted, “having started a disastrous, failed war of choice and holding record-low approval numbers, Trump has retreated to party planning and interior decorating.”

There are clearly portions of the initial “flood the zone” agenda that are still chugging forward. Mass deportation efforts remain ongoing in the background, though ICE has yet to release updated arrest data since scaling back its more attention-grabbing operations in late January. Likewise, the administration continues to undercut Congress and wage Trump’s retribution campaign against his enemies. Federal departments and agencies out of step with the MAGA ethos remain under threat, as new efforts to downsize the Education Department Tuesday show. And the Supreme Court is still due to weigh in on several cases that could further empower the executive branch.

But the radical period of transformation that those around Trump hoped to foster has not come to pass. There has been simply too much resistance for the administration to fully overwhelm the system. There is no time for Trump’s foes to let down their defenses, however. The retrenchment we’re seeing from the White House ahead of the midterms could precipitate a renewed campaign next year. But rather than simply accept the oncoming storm as inevitable, there is still time to ensure that in the long term Trump’s sound and fury signify nothing.

Hayes Brown is a writer and editor for MS NOW. He focuses on policymaking at the federal level, including Congress and the White House.

The Dictatorship

Markwayne Mullin’s investments in the kratom industry look like a clear conflict of interest

Published

21 hours ago

June 21, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Jun. 21, 2026, 6:00 AM EDT

ByDonald K. Sherman

What do gas station drugs, conflicts of interest and the Trump administration have in common? Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin.

A New York Times report earlier this week revealed the significant role Mullin has played in an influence campaign advocating for kratom, a supplement commonly sold at gas stations that allegedly relieves pain or boosts energy, but is linked to risk of liver toxicity, seizures and substance use disorder. Kratom has also been found in the system of thousands of people who died of drug overdoses.

As a senator from Oklahoma, Mullin endorsed proposed federal restrictions on kratom’s more potent competitors. He also reportedly urged officials in the Department of Health and Human Services to remove language from the Food and Drug Administration website about the possible dangers of using kratom, both as a senator and as DHS secretary. It is unclear why the homeland security secretary would be involved in such decisions. (Mullin hasn’t commented on the Times’ reporting, but DHS said in a statement that the secretary “follows all ethics and conflict of interest standards and has not lobbied for any individual or company.”)

Mullin has apparently gone out of his way to advocate for a supplement that is not regulated by the FDA and whose effects on the body are not well understood.

What we just learned from Mullin’s financial disclosure paperwork is that the secretary owns an investment worth as much as $1 million in a kratom company, Botanic Tonics. It’s not clear when he acquired this stake, but he has not filed paperwork to say he divested from it. Mullin has said in March that he would divest from dozens of potentially conflicting investments should he be confirmed as DHS secretary. Botanic Tonics does not appear to have been part of that list at the time, but given Mullin’s reported advocacy for kratom as part of the Trump administration, he should certainly divest now.

This looks like a textbook conflict of interest, where it is impossible to know if Mullin is advocating for policies that are best for the public or if he is prioritizing his own bottom line at the expense of public health and safety.

Mullin’s history doesn’t inspire a ton of confidence. He did not come to DHS with an ethically clean slate, having violated the STOCK Act by failing to properly report years of stock and bond trades. Some of his activity involved stock trading closely tied to industries he regulated and may have had sensitive knowledge of. Even if Mullin has a third party managing his portfolio, as he claims, as an officeholder, he is legally responsible for avoiding and remediating his own conflicts of interest.

The public should never have to question whether government officials are using their power for their own benefit, but Mullin’s conduct is particularly galling because President Donald Trump fired his predecessor at DHS, Kristi Noemafter she faced serious ethics issues that often distracted from her critical government role. These included her apparent failure to report outside income from a dark money group earned while serving as governor of South Dakota, and a subcontractor tied to Noem secretly receiving a DHS ad contract, outside of the normal competitive bidding process. (Noem’s lawyer told ProPublica“Then-Governor Noem fully complied with the letter and the spirit of the law; and Noem said she followed proper procedures with regards to the DHS ad contract.”)

While this seemed like a rare moment of accountability and possibly correcting course, appointing and confirming Mullin appears to have been more of the same.

The public should never have to question whether government officials are using their power for their own benefit.

And then, there’s the kratom itself. Mullin has apparently gone out of his way to advocate for a supplement that is not regulated by the FDA and whose effects on the body are not well understood. As part of this effort, he has reportedly tried to downplay health concerns about kratom. The supplement’s health risks can include addiction and withdrawal, liver damage, anxiety, hallucinations and psychosis. (Botanic Tonics, the company Mullin invested in, insists its products are safe and says it “has consistently advocated for regulations that distinguish between authentic kratom leaf products and synthetic derivatives.”)

All of these facts together raise another important question: How can someone who did not proactively divest from an obvious and dangerous conflict of interest, and who could not effectively manage a third-party adviser overseeing his investments to ensure compliance with the STOCK Act, ethically lead a massive agency consisting of more than 260,000 people covering everything from aviation, election and border security, to emergency response?

It’s up to Mullin to start building trust with the public by divesting his interests in kratom, and if he does not, Congress must intervene.

Donald K. Sherman

Donald K. Sherman is executive director and chief counsel of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington. Before joining CREW, he was an oversight and ethics lawyer in the House, the Senate and the Obama administration. He also was chief oversight counsel to the late Rep. Elijah E. Cummings on the House Oversight Committee.

The Dictatorship

I love my father deeply — which is why I want him to die quickly

Published

21 hours ago

June 21, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Jun. 21, 2026, 6:00 AM EDT

My father is dying. I suppose we all are, but he is actively closer to death than anyone else I know.

My father began declining in 2020. First, his body started to give up on him. He has Parkinson’s disease. One day he tried to get out of bed and his legs didn’t work, so he fell out of bed, and ended up in the hospital. Another day, his right hand stopped working, so he could barely use his phone or computer, his only points of contact with the outside world (he’s almost entirely lost his ability to write), making him further isolated. A few years after his Parkinson’s diagnosis, my father’s mind started to give out on him, too. He developed dementia, a diagnosis he steadfastly refuses to admit or discuss, which makes taking care of him even more challenging.

As an academic and intellectual, this is a perceived humiliation my father cannot bear. He has fits of anger, confusion, fear, frustration and disorientation. I spoke to him last week while he was in the hospital for yet another issue (a now semi-regular occurrence) and he started shouting, “I don’t know why the hell I’m here! Get me out of here, talk to someone!”

This is an incredibly difficult piece to write — one I almost didn’t.

To make matters more complicated, he now lives in Pakistan, where he is from, while I live in the United States and my mother, who co-caretakes with me, is based in South Africa. He lived in the States for most of his adult life, but we simply could not afford the cost here of the full-time care he needs. Even with the privilege of being upper-middle class, the more than $20,000 a month for full-time care was way more than we could afford, and this is not even for any specialized care.

This is an incredibly difficult piece to write — one I almost didn’t. There are serious ethical implications to consider as I discuss my father’s health. But I have ultimately decided to share my experience because I think it’s important to have conversations about the isolation and inhumanity of the end-of-life care systems that fail us. These are conversations we too often turn away from out of fear and discomfort. The intention here is to honor my father because approaching death with dignity honors the dignity of his life, too.

So, as I watch my father’s body and mind slowly and increasingly fail him, and I see the fear and suffering he endures on a daily basis, I can only hope that the end of his life is not drawn out.

I spoke about this with a dear friend recently, about how excruciating this process has been to witness and partake in, about our caretaker burnout, about the many, many systems that fail the sick and elderly, about how each week there is a new crisis. She gave me Atul Gawande’s book “Being Mortal: Medicine and What Matters in the End.” Gawande’s central argument is that both the medical community and modern society are woefully ill-equipped to deal with mortality in a dignified way and that the most humane thing we can do is to focus on the quality of life of the elderly and terminally ill, rather than longevity.

As I explained to my friend, I’ve been sitting with an intense polarization around how I think about my father’s death: some parts of me wishing the end of his life is not drawn out, while others feel guilt and shame for wishing that my father dies quickly. Gawande’s book has been a profound balm in this process. “Our reluctance to honestly examine the experience of aging and dying has increased the harm we inflict on people and denied them the basic comforts they most need,” he writes. “Lacking a coherent view of how people might live successfully all the way to their very end, we have allowed our fates to be controlled by the imperatives of medicine, technology, and strangers.”

Medicine, technology, and strangers. This trifecta now rules my father’s waning life. His full-time carers are strangers to him, and he to them. And some combination of technology and medicine is helping to prolong an existence full of fear and suffering.

What I have ultimately come to realize is that the only true solution here is not a medical one but a spiritual one. Death is too big for the human mind to hold. And grief, when we try to hold it alone, tears away at our lives. The only way any of this becomes manageable, in my experience, is if we hand these over to something bigger than ourselves. My faith is a big part of my life, so, for me, that something is god. For someone else, it might be a different spiritual belief or it might look like surrendering to the present. But the answer is certainly not in the illusion of control that medicine alone can create for patients and their families.

Mortality — our own and that of our loved ones — demands that we meet it with expansiveness in order to stay sane, otherwise our fear (an inherently constricting emotion) of death takes hold. Modern medicine tends to make everything smaller, with its hyperspecialization, its focus on how things are working at a cellular level. My father has a cadre of doctors, each focusing on a different part of his body.

I do not mean to dismiss the miracles of modern medicine, which have saved me and my body in so many ways over the course of my own life. But I invite us, like Gawande, to consider when the most loving thing we can do is to not interfere.

I wonder how different the end of my father’s life would feel to him if everyone around him was focused on offering him spiritual care rather than on the technical measures to keep him alive for as long as possible. I have tried in my own ways to reorient our approach to his care, but our collective resistance to mortality — sometimes my own included — and the concomitant systems that do exist to take care of the elderly make it feel impossible sometimes. And I can see his body and mind desperately attempt to prepare him for death even as parts of him, and everyone around him, resist it. This untended anxiety is leaking out of him. He calls me in the middle of the night when he can’t sleep to apologize for all the ways he failed my brother and me when we were children, his voice scared and desperate as he attempts to clean his fading conscience as much as he can, while he still can.

He calls me in the middle of the night when he can’t sleep to apologize for all the ways he failed my brother and me when we were children, his voice scared and desperate as he attempts to clean his fading conscience as much as he can, while he still can.

Interventions of modern medicine and carers to prevent falling (a common cause of death for people with Parkinson’s) could potentially prolong my father’s life for some time. He is in that precarious place that the elderly often find themselves in, where he could die in six months or in six years. But to what end are we prolonging his life? Our collective approach to end-of-life care is driven by distorted priorities, which come at great personal and financial cost. “The soaring cost of health care has become the greatest threat to the long-term solvency of most advanced nations, and the incurable account for a lot of it,” Gawande notes. “In the United States, 25 percent of all Medicare spending is for the 5 percent of patients who are in their final year of life, and most of that money goes for care in their last couple of months that is of little apparent benefit.”

In his book, Gawande anticipates criticisms of his argument, suggesting some might fear that it “raises the specter of a society readying itself to sacrifice its sick and aged.” He aptly responds, “But what if the sick and aged are already being sacrificed — victims of our refusal to accept the inexorability of our life cycle?”

There is a strange paradox to death. It is at once incredibly straightforward and deeply complicated. Maybe this is what separates the act, an uncomplicated one, from the process, which is almost always complex.

And if there is one thing I’ve learned watching my father disintegrate, it’s that our various approaches to end-of-life care are not working. The helplessness and fear is consuming him. It is out of a deep and abiding sense of love that I hope his suffering is minimized and his life is brought to a merciful end.

Noor Noman is a writer focused on culture, race and LGBTQ issues.