The seize of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro, together with current feedback from the White Home have made clear that US President Donald Trump’s ambition to take over Greenland must be taken very severely. European governments are reportedly discussing contingency plans if he makes good on his threats.
A US army assault on the territory of a pleasant European nation — successfully the top of the NATO alliance — nonetheless appears unlikely, although can’t be dominated out completely. Whereas there have been proposals to station extra troops in Greenland as a deterrent, for now, European governments appear to view that step as unnecessarily escalatory.
A political and financial marketing campaign to stress Europe into giving up Greenland appears extra probably. The very best hope of stopping the US from going farther down this highway could also be simply how unpopular the thought is in Greenland itself and in america.
Nobody is laughing about Greenland anymore.
President Donald Trump’s ceaselessly expressed want for the US to take possession of the world’s largest island could as soon as have been handled as a lark, troll, or distraction, however following final week’s seize of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro, it’s develop into clear that Trump is more and more buying a style for army motion and that he’s even much less constrained by worldwide norms than beforehand thought.
“We do want Greenland, completely,” Trump mentioned, shortly after the Maduro raid, describing it as “surrounded by Russian and Chinese language ships.” The White Home mentioned on Tuesday that Trumpand his senior advisers are discussing choices for how one can take over the Danish territory and that army power is “all the time an possibility.”
Trump’s senior adviser, Stephen Miller, dismissed the concept there was something stopping the US from pursuing its imperialist visions within the far north, telling CNN’s Jake Tapper, “No person’s going to combat america militarily over the way forward for Greenland. … We reside in a world, in the true world, Jake, that’s ruled by energy, that’s ruled by power, that’s ruled by energy.” (Secretary of State Marco Rubio took a softer line, saying no invasion was imminent and that the aim is to buy Greenland. Neither Denmark nor Greenland have indicated any curiosity in promoting.)
Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen responded to the threats by saying that Trump’s ambitions for the territory ought to be taken severely and that “If america had been to decide on to assault one other NATO nation, then all the pieces would come to an finish. The worldwide neighborhood as we all know it, democratic guidelines of the sport, NATO, the world’s strongest defensive alliance — all of that may collapse if one NATO nation selected to assault one other.”
On Tuesday, the leaders of six European nations together with Greenland issued a joint assertion affirming the significance of territorial integrity and stating that “it’s for Denmark and Greenland and them solely, to resolve on issues regarding Denmark and Greenland.” The French authorities says it’s in communication with companions over plans to reply if Trump makes good on his threats.
Sturdy phrases, however can Europe again them up? If we take Trump at his phrase that he plans to take some motion on Greenland “in about two months,” what can Denmark and its European allies do earlier than then to dissuade him? And if he follows by on his threats, what prices are they keen to pay to combat again?
Would the US actually get right into a taking pictures struggle over Greenland?
The thought of an precise US vs. Europe army battle over Greenland nonetheless appears outlandish, even after what occurred in Venezuela, although European nations aren’t discounting it completely. A international outlook revealed by Denmark’s intelligence service in in December categorized america, for the primary time, as a safety danger, writing that Washington “makes use of financial energy, together with within the type of threats of excessive tariffs, to implement its will and not excludes using army power, even towards allies.” The nation’s international ministry has arrange a “night time watch” to observe Trump’s actions and social media exercise posts whereas the remainder of the nation is sleeping.
“I completely suppose there’s the political will to guard Greenland.”
— Rachel Rizzo, senior fellow targeted on transatlantic safety on the Observer Analysis Basis
Early in 2025, when it first grew to become clear Trump wasn’t going to let the difficulty drop, the French authorities mentioned sending troops to Greenland as a deterrent, although the proposal hasn’t gone anyplace since then. The consensus for now amongst European governments is {that a} army build-up to counter america would danger additional inflaming tensions with Trump whereas nonetheless most likely not being sufficient to carry off a (nonetheless exhausting to think about) US operation to grab the territory by power.
“For all the army belongings that Europe has and that NATO has, america nonetheless stays the spine of NATO, and I feel that that’s why that is additionally such an unprecedented dialog that we’re having,” mentioned Rachel Rizzo, a senior fellow targeted on transatlantic safety on the India-based Observer Analysis Basis.
Trump has mocked Denmark’s current strikes to bolster safety in Denmark by saying that they had added “yet one more dogsled.” The truth is, Copenhagen introduced a brand new $4.26 billion arctic safety bundle in November, together with two extra naval vessels and 16 F-35 fighter jets. Paradoxically, that is the form of spending Trump, who has lengthy accused NATO nations of skimping on their very own protection and free-riding on US safety ensures, has referred to as for, although till not too long ago the concept elevated spending would supply safety from america would have appeared very unusual.
Even with a bulked-up army, Denmark and allies is probably not a match for the US in a traditional struggle. Danish commentators calling for extra troops to be despatched to Greenland acknowledge this could be principally a symbolic step. Nonetheless, it’s value noting that Denmark not solely fought alongside america in Afghanistan — a main supply of frustration now that they’re being bullied by its authorities — however misplaced across the similar variety of troops per capita.. Trump and Miller’s dismissive feedback apart, this isn’t a rustic that lacks the need to defend itself.
“I completely suppose there’s the political will to guard Greenland,” Rizzo mentioned.
Trump might threaten Greenland in different methods
If it’s nonetheless exhausting to think about even Trump militarily invading a pleasant European NATO ally, it’s a lot simpler to think about him making use of political and financial stress to get what he needs. European officers interviewed in a current Atlantic article sketched out a situation during which Trump merely declares Greenland to be a US protectorate. He might then use varied types of leverage to stress Denmark and different European governments to just accept US management of Greenland as a fait accompli. This might embrace his most popular financial weapon, tariffs. He might additionally threaten to tug america out of NATO —a situation that appeared very potential throughout his first time period however that he has spoken much less about these days. Lastly, he might return to a different acquainted supply of leverage: threatening to withhold ongoing US weapons help and intelligence help to Ukraine.
What can Europe do to stop this? The primary alternative is prone to reduce a take care of the notoriously transactional president. It’s develop into clear that Trump’s curiosity in Greenland is not only about leverage or stress — he sincerely needs the island, both as a result of he’s genuinely apprehensive about Chinese language and Russian actions within the Arctic or as a result of he’s merely focused on territorial enlargement as an finish unto itself. However might savvy diplomacy flip his obsession into a type of leverage? The query now dealing with European leaders, says Liana Repair, senior fellow for Europe on the Council on International Relations, is “is there one thing that may give Donald Trump a win that doesn’t violate the sovereignty of Denmark?”
One motive Europeans are skeptical of Trump’s acknowledged concern in regards to the island’s safety wants is that the US army already has broad latitude by prior protection agreements to function within the territory. The Danish authorities has additionally made clear it’s open to an expanded US troop presence in Greenland and elevated US mining exercise, as long as it stays sovereign Danish territory, however this was apparently not sufficient for the Trump administration.
It’s potential there could also be an unrelated problem Europe might reduce a deal on in alternate for Trump backing off, similar to the Digital Providers Act, which is strongly opposed by US tech firms and has been harshly criticized by Vice President JD Vance, Elon Musk, and others in Trump’s orbit.
Repair notes that “it’s a nice line to stroll, to not seem like appeasing” Trump. That is one case, she notes, the place “appeasing is prone to backfire.”
European governments might threaten to sanction US firms or unload US bonds, however on the finish of the day, notes Rizzo, “Europe doesn’t have that a lot leverage economically over america,” which has already helped Trump in commerce talks this time period, and is probably going the explanation he feels emboldened to deal with Denmark this fashion.
The very best weapon the Europeans could have for resisting US stress could also be simply how unpopular an concept that is in all corners of the Atlantic. Danish rule is a fraught problem in Greenland and all of the island’s political events help eventual independence, albeit on completely different timelines. However Ulrik Pram Gad, a senior researcher on the Danish Institute for Worldwide Research, famous that Trump’s brute-force method has offended Greenlanders as nicely, resulting in elevated coordination between Nuuk, the Greenlandic capital, and Copenhagen. The Greenland authorities has refused to interact in bilateral talks with the People with out Danish involvement, a chance they may have jumped at underneath different circumstances.
Polls present US management of Greenland is deeply unpopular there. “It has been very tough for the US administration, for the MAGA universe, to inform tales about anybody in Greenland truly desirous to be American,” Gad mentioned. A go to by second girl Usha Vance to Nuuk was scrapped in March amid stories of deliberate protests, although the administration blamed scheduling points. The truth that one notably vocal Greenlandic Trump superfan, stonemason Jørgen Boassen, has develop into a quasi-celebrity who appears to be interviewed in almost each article in regards to the matter, signifies that there’s most likely not a large base of help for US annexation.
The shortage of any widespread base of native help would make it tough for the US to tug off a model of the “little inexperienced males” operation Russia carried out in Crimea in 2014, which concerned Russian forces taking on the area whereas presenting it as an area rebellion towards Ukrainian rule. Whether or not or not they had been truly a majority, there a minimum of was a big quantity of native help for Russian rule in Crimea. That’s not the case in Greenland.
Trump prefers fast and overwhelming victories in his international coverage actions — arresting Maduro, bombing Iran’s nuclear websites. Even when he might take over Greenland, and even when he doesn’t care about successfully destroying NATO, how a lot sense does it make for the US to rule long-term over a hostile inhabitants in a territory that polls present People overwhelmingly don’t even need? A YouGov survey launched this week exhibits solely 8 p.c of People help utilizing power to take Greenland and simply 28 p.c help buying it.
Finish of the highway for the alliance?
All of that is happening towards the backdrop of the struggle in Ukraine and ongoing efforts to succeed in a ceasefire. Simply this week, even amid the rising Greenland tensions, France and the UK introduced a plan for future safety ensures for Ukraine that envisions the US enjoying a outstanding function in monitoring the ceasefire.
Would European governments actually be keen to explode the transatlantic safety alliance over Greenland?
For all Trump’s bluster and shock tweets, Europeans have been pretty profitable at holding him onside over the previous 12 months in relation to NATO usually and persevering with materials help for Ukraine specifically. That is probably one main motive why European governments have been reluctant to criticize Trump’s Greenland ambitions too strongly.
So the query is, would European governments actually be keen to explode the transatlantic safety alliance over Greenland? The reply — notably from Denmark, as Frederiksen’s feedback this week indicated, is that by taking Greenland towards their will, Trump would have blown it up anyway.
“Mainly, all of the vital European nations perceive and agree that Europe will must be impartial from the US in the long term,” mentioned Gad, the Danish analyst. “The fundamental dynamic remains to be that we have to make this [alliance ] disintegrate so slowly that we don’t get in numerous bother earlier than the method is over.”
In different phrases, policymakers in Copenhagen, Paris, Berlin, London, and elsewhere would little question choose the method of weaning themself off dependence on america for his or her safety to occur on their very own timeline fairly than one dictated by Trump, notably with a significant struggle raging on their doorstep, however they could not have that luxurious.
“Why on Earth would we wish to make a take care of Donald Trump [over Greenland] when the expectation is that he received’t preserve it anyway?” Gad mentioned. The mistrust is prone to outlast this presidency.
“You elected the man twice; we are able to’t belief you,” Gad added.
