Europe talks tough on Greenland, but Washington holds leverage

European leaders are debating whether to retaliate against US President Donald Trump’s renewed pressure campaign aimed at securing US control over Greenland, but analysts warn that escalating the dispute into a full-blown trade or political confrontation could expose Europe’s underlying strategic weakness.

Trump’s posture toward Denmark — a long-standing NATO ally — has provoked widespread outrage across Europe. Some officials and commentators have floated boycotts of American imports and social-media platforms, while others have urged the European Union to deploy its so-called trade “bazooka” against Washington. The impulse, as an opinoion piece by Bloomberg points out,  reflects growing frustration with years of diplomatic restraint that have failed to moderate Trump’s behaviour.

The argument for toughness rests on the belief that appeasement has emboldened the US president. Trump has repeatedly claimed that the United States “has to have” Greenland for national security reasons. However, former US officials dispute that assertion, noting that Washington already enjoys extensive military access on the island.

Frank Rose, who served as deputy assistant secretary of state for space and defensce policy during the Obama administration, led negotiations with Denmark and Greenland on an early-warning radar near Pituffik Space Base. Under a 1951 US-Danish defenxe treaty, Rose said, “we can basically do anything in Greenland we want.” He added that the existing arrangement also shields Washington from Greenland’s complex domestic politics — “a boon worth having,” based on his direct experience.

Despite this, the dispute has taken on broader geopolitical significance. As US  Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent stated on January 18, Washington calculates that Europe will ultimately back down because it cannot afford to jeopardise NATO cohesion or support for Ukraine. Trump, who often treats trade and security as interchangeable sources of leverage, appears willing to test that assumption.

The risk for Europe is fragmentation. Countries most exposed to Russian aggression, including Poland and the Baltic states, depend heavily on the US security umbrella and are unlikely to support measures that could threaten intelligence sharing or weapons supplies to Kyiv. Southern European economies also face vulnerabilities. According to the Brussels-based think tank Bruegel, Italy would be among the most exposed to the fallout from a US–EU trade war, helping explain Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni’s reluctance to join symbolic European troop deployments to Greenland.

The United Kingdom faces similar constraints. After sending a single officer to Nuuk, London was nonetheless threatened with US tariffs. Prime Minister Keir Starmer condemned that response as “completely wrong,” but stopped short of endorsing confrontation, citing the importance of exports, investment, intelligence cooperation and Britain’s reliance on US-made missiles for its Trident nuclear deterrent.

The limited European military presence in Greenland — a few dozen troops intended to signal resolve — may have underscored these divisions rather than deterring Washington. Critics argue it provided Trump with justification to escalate tariff threats while highlighting Europe’s inability to act collectively.

The column concludes that Europe lacks the power to sustain a confrontation that spans trade, defense and intelligence. Its best hope may lie in domestic US resistance, particularly among Republicans uneasy with the idea of undermining NATO over what critics view as a symbolic or personal project. Trump has reportedly linked his Greenland ambitions to the Nobel Committee’s refusal to award him a peace prize.

While territorial acquisitions were once commonplace — Denmark sold the US Virgin Islands to Washington in 1917 — the postwar order relied heavily on American restraint. The analysis argues that Europe is now struggling to defend those norms at a moment when the United States itself appears willing to discard them.

By Sabina Mammadli