How can Europe prevent Trump from taking control of Greenland?

This is where we stand now.

Ever since Donald Trump took office again last January, there has been a targeted campaign directed at Greenland. Some of it has been visible and loud, like when Vice President JD Vance suddenly visited the Pituffik base in March. More subtle are the influence campaigns by the Maga movement and attempts by American billionaires to buy properties and businesses in Greenland.

Most recently, Trump appointed Louisiana Governor Jeff Landry as special envoy to Greenland. In an interview with CNBC on January 6, Landry said:

»We can offer the Greenlanders a path to independence.«

Without Denmark. Without Europe.

So far, the influence campaigns have not been very effective. On the contrary, attitudes in Greenland have become increasingly anti-American in response to Trump’s pressure, according to surveys.

After the military intervention in Venezuela, Trump stated that a military intervention could not be ruled out in Greenland either, and that the question of Greenland could be revisited »in 20 days«.

Day by day, the tone is becoming sharper.

In a major interview with The New York Times published Thursday evening, Trump now says that ownership of Greenland is »psychologically needed for success«. When asked whether he prioritizes ownership of Greenland or the preservation of NATO higher, he responds: »It may be a choice«. And adds that the defense alliance is useless without the USA.

Europe’s soft rejection

Since the first Trump threats last year, the Danish and European strategy has been to keep a low profile to avoid escalating the situation.

Now they conclude that it didn’t work.

So what do the Europeans intend to do?

On Wednesday, the French Foreign Minister, Jean-Noël Barrot, stated that they are working on a plan with their allies on how European countries will respond if the USA follows through on its threats against Greenland.

Politiken asked the French Foreign Ministry which scenarios they are specifically working on. The ministry does not wish to answer.

The European reaction will depend on the Americans’ next move, assesses Élie Tenenbaum, director of Ifri, one of France’s leading think tanks for international politics and security analysis.

»Depending on whether it is a direct, military action – or a more political maneuver – it will affect the European response«.

According to Tenenbaum, Europe could regain the initiative by convening a high-profile transatlantic summit in Greenland and inviting Washington to clarify its ideas – a meeting led by Denmark and Greenland and backed by powerful NATO allies like France, Germany, the United Kingdom, and Canada.

»Trump has never been to Greenland himself, and maybe in this way, they could call him out, force him to present his plan and confront him with it. It would compel the Americans to explain themselves, and then you can start discussing the substance«.

Initially, the Europeans are trying to convince Trump that Arctic security can be strengthened through more NATO engagement.

Trump is losing patience. And therefore, it is reported that his administration is outlining various options to gain control of Greenland.

»The Americans believe it has been going on long enough, so we are approaching the phase where a concrete proposal from the USA will emerge«, says Rasmus Sinding Søndergaard, senior researcher at the Danish Institute for International Studies (Diis).

In recent days, Foreign Minister Marco Rubio has reiterated Trump’s desire since 2019 to make the biggest real estate deal of his life. However, there are certain problems — besides the obvious fact that Greenlanders refuse to be bought.

Trump needs Congress to support the idea of allocating funds for the project, and support for these plans is not significant, neither in Congress nor among the American public. A YouGov poll on Wednesday showed that only 28 percent of Americans support buying Greenland, while 45 percent are against it

»So it is hard to see how he secures a large majority in Congress to support buying Greenland. Of course, one cannot rule out that he finds a creative way to secure the funds, such as the oil money in Venezuela, which is allegedly going into a fund with Trump’s name on it«, says Rasmus Sinding Søndergaard.

It might be easier to gain support for making an association agreement with Greenland, which is also planned. It is both legal, and the USA already has such military security agreements with the Marshall Islands, Palau, and Micronesia. The problem is that it takes a long time.

»First, Greenland must exercise the right to hold a referendum on independence. It is hard to imagine under the current government, so it would probably first require an election. Afterward, they must negotiate with the USA, and then go through another referendum. And Trump still needs to have it approved by two-thirds of the Senate«, says Rasmus Sinding Søndergaard.

»It will take much longer than just ’buying Greenland,’ and the question is whether Trump has the patience for it, especially if he wants to get it done during his presidential term«.

Rasmus Sinding Søndergaard believes that Trump wants to act quickly. Especially because his room for maneuver will be significantly reduced if the Democrats win both chambers of Congress in the midterm elections in November.

Europe bares its teeth

If the diplomatic route does not work, Europe may be forced to show its teeth.

This can be done by using what is called »symbolic military measures« and sending European military personnel to Greenland — coordinated with Greenland and Denmark. To show that Europeans are present but that they do not (necessarily) intend a confrontation.

»Not to seriously deter militarily, but to show that if the Americans choose a military solution tomorrow, it would involve direct confrontation with European soldiers«, says Élie Tenenbaum.

The purpose would be to force the Americans to think twice.

Security expert Nicole Gnesotto from the French think tank Institut Jacques Delors also suggests that one clear way to reject the USA’s claim on Greenland is for Europeans to deploy ’purely deterrent’ troops in Greenland.

»To tell the Americans: ’Well? Are you ready to kill your own NATO soldiers?’«

According to the defence agreement on Greenland between the USA and Denmark concluded in 1951, it is unclear whether European military personnel can be sent to Greenland without both Danish/Greenlandic and American consent.

The agreement does not directly mention forces from third countries, but it emphasizes that »changed NATO plans« require »joint consent.«

Last year, France offered to send troops to Greenland but said Denmark rejected the idea. Right now, no leaders are talking about sending European troops there.

If Greenlanders and Danes continue to be difficult to negotiate with, Trump might move on to the next phase: threats and possibly military annexation. Initially, he could threaten to punish Danish companies. He could withdraw support for Ukraine and threaten to dissolve NATO, which would cause panic in large parts of Europe and put pressure on Denmark from countries where the NATO alliance is more important than the Danish kingdom.

And ultimately, he could do as he did in Venezuela.

»I could definitely see a situation where the US basically says, Denmark, you need to move your troops out of Greenland, and messages to the Greenland police to not obstruct, or else they’re, they’re also going to be, you know, destroyed«, says Max Bergmann, director for Europe, Russia, and Eurasia at the American think tank Center for Strategic and International Studies.

He has no doubt that the U.S. military has been asked to develop a plan for how they could militarily intervene in Greenland, just like with Venezuela.

»I think is totally on the table, because if the president orders it, the military is going to deliver it. And we have a Secretary of Defense who’s, you know, deeply obsequious to Trump, and is unlike the first administration«, he says.

Rasmus Sinding Søndergaard agrees.

A military operation can be initiated by the president without Congress and without extensive explanations. The problems arise afterward when Trump needs to secure support in Congress to find funding and a legal status for Greenland, whether in the form of an association agreement or a special territory with autonomy.

According to YouGov, only 8 percent of Americans, and only 15 percent of Trump’s own Republicans, support a military operation against Greenland. So the appetite for cleaning up after Trump’s imperial dreams does not seem overwhelming.

The European offensive

But before we reach an American military operation, a European reaction becomes inevitable.

»And it’s better that it is proactive and coordinated rather than reactive and chaotic«, says Élie Tenenbaum.

Several experts have discussed the possibility of imposing European sanctions on certain American companies and products and implementing travel bans on individuals.

European sanctions are theoretically realistic, according to Élie Tenenbaum.

»But they will not be a deterrent for the Americans«.

»Because Europeans have never shown themselves capable of imposing tough sanctions on the U.S.«, he says.

According to the renowned French security researcher François Heisbourg, the next step could be Europeans threatening to stop purchasing American weapons and excluding the U.S. from the European digital market.

Sanctions that Nicole Gnesotto calls »extreme«.

»If Americans land with helicopters tomorrow, establish bases, or start drilling without consent, then it could be possible to go that way. But first come sanctions against individuals, then against companies«, she says.

Germany’s foreign minister, Johann Wadephul, has expressed hope that the conflict can be resolved within NATO by addressing U.S. security demands. Meanwhile, Mette Frederiksen warns that the NATO alliance is dead if the U.S. seriously considers annexing Greenland.

Mujtaba Rhaman, Europe director at Eurasia Group, agrees, but he also sees another scenario where Greenland and Denmark could be forced to agree to American takeover of Greenland because the fear of the U.S. withdrawing from NATO is greater.

»Denmark will be in a collective with the Europeans, and a brave face will be presented and it will be ‘unity with America, just look at these new arrangements - diplomatic, legal, economic, security. It’s great for Greenland, great for Denmark,great for America, great for the Alliance. But the actual truth will be, that Denmark and Europe were forced to concede to something they thought was unacceptable - because of American power and European weakness«, he says, reminding that this is exactly what happened when the EU was forced to swallow Trump’s tariffs on his ’Liberation Day’.

»Everyone was there kind of smiling. We’ve got a deal and it’s great, but actually the Europeans have been completely screwed by what the Americans have done«.