1. S. Conn and B. Fairchild (1960) The United States Army in World War II, The Western Hemisphere, The Framework for Hemisphere Defence (Washington: Government Printing Office), p. 13.
2. The concept of security governance has been articulated and debated from multiple, but often conflicting, perspectives. Realist scholars discuss the issue in terms of power, hegemony, and empire; neo-liberal scholars through rational and functional institutions; and constructivists through the impact of ideas on the evolution of systems. This chapter will employ Adler and Greve’s constructivist approach, in which they define security governance ‘as a system of rule conceived by individual and corporate actors aiming at coordinating, managing, and regulating their collective existence in response to threats of their physical or ontological security’. See E. Adler and P. Greve (2009) ‘When Security Community Meets Balance of Power: Overlapping Regional Mechanisms of Security Governance’, Review of International Studies, 35:64.
3. For example, while there are a number of Danish-language sources which examine bilateral relations between Denmark and the United States during the war, including the details of the agreement on the defense of Greenland, these do not adequately discuss the internal decisions that were made to justify the application of the Monroe Doctrine to the island. Major Danish works on the period are F. Løkkegaard (1968) Det danske Gesantskab i Washington 1940–1942: Henrik Kauffmann som uafhae ngig dansk gesandt i USA 1940–1942 og hans politik vedrørende Grønland og de oplagte danske skibe i America (Copenhagen: Glydendal);
4. B. Lidegaard (2006) Overleveren — Dansk Udrigspolitiks Historie, Bind 4, 1914–1945 (København: Gyldendaal);
5. B. Lidegaard (1997) I Kongens Navn: Henrik Kauffmann i dansk diplomati 1919–1958 (København: Samleren);