By Matt Underwood Europe Backs Greenland After Trump Resumes Takeover Threats
It seems Europe is stepping up to bat, offering its support to Greenland after the resurgence of talk about a potential US takeover, stirred by none other than Donald Trump. Across the continent, major players are voicing their solidarity with the semi-autonomous Danish territory, with the UK’s Prime Minister, Keir Starmer, clearly stating that Greenland’s future rests in the hands of Denmark and Greenland itself. The timing of these expressions of support is interesting, especially given the parallels some see between Trump’s actions in Venezuela and the current situation. There’s a growing sense that the US might be applying a similar playbook to Greenland.
What’s quite striking is the perceived lack of vocal opposition from within the US itself. While Democrats might express disbelief or handwringing, some believe that focusing on Trump’s health or other issues overshadows the bigger picture: the US seemingly turning its back on democratic principles abroad. This isn’t just about Greenland; it’s a pattern, from Ukraine to Venezuela. The worry is that this disregard for democracy, the rule of law, and the willingness to use force could eventually turn inward, affecting the US itself.
The core reason behind Trump’s interest in Greenland, according to some perspectives, is the oldest trick in the book of autocracy: consolidating power at home by projecting strength abroad. The concern is that Americans are seeing a glimpse of their own future in this scenario, and a more robust response is needed. The consequences of a US takeover of Greenland would be far-reaching, potentially devastating US relations with key allies. Greenland, after all, is a territory of Denmark, a stable democracy, a member of the EU and NATO.
While Trump *could* conceivably seize Greenland, the potential fallout is enormous. The US could find itself isolated on the world stage, lacking allies when it needs them. The “America First” mantra could easily morph into “America Alone,” and Europe, and other allies, might be less inclined to offer support. Some suggest that a change in leadership in the White House would see Democrats immediately returning Greenland to the Greenlandic people and denouncing Trump’s actions. The belief is that this isn’t the majority view in the US, and that Trump’s legacy will be reversed.
The very idea of a US presence in Greenland is fraught with challenges. The notion of mass migration of Americans to a freezing and sparsely populated island seems unrealistic. The Greenlandic population is already firmly against US intervention. The reality might be a scenario of soldiers and law enforcement officials in a landscape where they are largely ignored, the locals continuing to live under Danish law and using the Euro, no matter what the invaders say. The US has a poor track record of successfully governing conquered territories, and this situation would likely be no different, leading to a “clown show and occupation.”
The situation raises crucial questions about boundaries and consequences. Will Europe do more than just voice concerns if the situation escalates? There’s a feeling that Europe needs to assert boundaries, to show that there are limits. One of the underlying drivers of the interest in Greenland could be the strategic importance of the GIUK Gap (Greenland-Iceland-United Kingdom Gap). The possibility that Russia could more easily access the Atlantic without the EU controlling access is a cause of alarm.
The suggestion that Trump could be planning military action is a major concern. Some believe the release of the unredacted Epstein files by European intelligence agencies might be a way of pushing back, but that is speculative. The potential impact on NATO is also a major consideration. If Trump were to force a takeover, NATO would become effectively useless, and the US military’s relationship with Europe would fundamentally change.
Europe would likely pursue increased military development without US involvement, seek alternative energy sources, and tighten intelligence sharing. The US’s ability to project power would be limited, and China’s influence would likely grow. The consensus is that invading Greenland is a bad idea, potentially leaving the US isolated. And it is a real possibility that Russia might be egging him on. The threats to sovereign nations makes Trump sound like a terrorist.