Greenland has become an inflection point in President Donald Trump’s foreign policy. In January this year, after Trump’s surprise attack on Venezuela and his threat to militarily occupy Greenland, a crack appeared in the Atlantic alliance. Rather than trying to placate or appease Trump, most European leaders instead began mobilizing military forces and drawing lines that must not be crossed.
Beneath the surface, diplomatic efforts are in full swing. U.S. and Danish government officials have held at least five closed-door meetings to find a compromise that would expand the U.S. military presence without undermining Denmark’s sovereignty or the Greenland self-government’s autonomy. One official familiar with the talks explained, “We have reached agreement on the broad framework and understand each other’s ‘red lines.'”
Occupying Greenland by force in the face of European military resistance appears to be a line Trump would find difficult to cross. The question is whether he can quickly find an exit at a time when other foreign policy problems are piling up. Trump has planned his project to take Greenland since his first term. This concept came to light through a Wall Street Journal report in 2019. According to that report, Trump considered purchasing Greenland after learning that Denmark faced financial difficulties in running the territory. In response, the Greenland self-government reacted sharply via Twitter, saying, “We are not for sale.”
But in Trump’s mind, Greenland was an object of a deal. As he began his second term, he mobilized his core support base, “MAGA.” American right-wing activist Charlie Kirk visited Greenland with Donald Trump Jr. in January last year and said he “would do anything to make Greenland part of the United States.” In his State of the Union address in March of the same year, Trump proposed that Greenland’s residents voluntarily join the United States. He views Greenland as an essential base for competition with Russia and China over the Arctic and for the “Golden Dome” missile defense system.
What unfolded over the following year was like a “game of chicken.” Trump barely changed course just before a clash. U.S. State Department officials had been quietly contacting Danish diplomats to seek a compromise that would allow an expanded U.S. military presence. But late last year, when Trump appointed Louisiana Governor Jeff Landry as special envoy, Denmark and Greenland strongly protested through a joint statement. In January this year, White House spokeswoman Karoline Leavitt’s statement that “using the U.S. military is always an option available to the commander in chief” appeared to be a direct military threat.
Europe embarked on what military strategists call “preparation for war.” On the 15th of the same month, Denmark, Britain, Germany, Sweden, France, Norway, the Netherlands and Finland dispatched troops to Greenland for a joint military exercise called “Operation Arctic Patience.” Trump then raised the pressure. On the 17th of the same month, he wrote on social media, “It’s time for Denmark to return (Greenland). World peace is at stake.” He then threatened to impose a 10% tariff on the eight countries that sent troops to Greenland starting in February, and to raise it to 25% starting in June if no agreement was reached on a complete and total purchase of Greenland. Financial markets plunged amid investor concerns that this might not be Trump’s bluff.
Trump decided to back down only after escalating the crisis to just before military mobilization. At the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, in January, he declared, “If we decided to use strength and force, nothing could stop us, but I will not do so.” Behind this retreat was the mediating role of NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte. On the same day, after his meeting with Secretary-General Rutte, Trump said they had reached “a framework for a future agreement on Greenland” and mentioned that he was withdrawing the new tariffs. Since then, U.S. and Danish diplomats have been working out the details. General Gregory Guillot, who leads U.S. Northern Command, told Congress in March that he had held “very productive discussions” with Denmark and Greenland. He said the three U.S. military bases to be established in Greenland would include space systems for missile defense, facilities for U.S. fighter jets and aerial refueling tankers, and a port for special operations forces.
Has the Greenland war truly been avoided? During Trump’s tenure, it’s not over until it’s over. And even after it’s over, it may not be over.