![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/gettyimages-2255678658.jpg\")
\n (Photo by Andrew Leyden\/Getty Images)<\/p>\n
\n (Photo by Andrew Leyden\/Getty Images)<\/p>\n
Emerging from talks with JD Vance and Marco Rubio in Washington on 14 January, Denmark\u2019s foreign minister Lars L\u00f8kke Rasmussen was variously seen fist-bumping the Danish ambassador and smoking a pipe. Later, at a joint news conference with Greenland\u2019s foreign minister, Vivian Motzfeldt, outside the Danish embassy, he attempted to put a diplomatic spin on their encounter with the Americans.<\/p>\n
He and Motzfeldt had held a \u201cfrank, but also constructive\u201d discussion with their US counterparts,\u201d Rasmussen said. They welcomed the opportunity to try to \u201ctake down the temperature\u201d and \u201cchallenge the narrative\u201d presented by Donald Trump. While the security situation in the Arctic was clearly evolving, for instance, there was no immediate threat from China and Russia towards Greenland, they had explained. In fact, according to Danish intelligence, the last time a Chinese warship had been seen near Greenland was around a decade ago. Rasmussen said they had agreed to establish a high-level working group to continue the dialogue, which is what diplomats do when it is clear there is no viable solution within reach.<\/p>\n
But despite his best efforts, there was no glossing over the fact that, as Rasmussen put it, \u201cwe still have a fundamental disagreement.\u201d He acknowledged that they had been unable to change the American position. \u201cIt is clear the president has this wish of conquering Greenland,\u201d he said, which would cross both Denmark\u2019s and Greenland\u2019s \u201cred lines\u201d. Motzfeldt similarly stressed that Greenland was open to strengthening co-operation with Washington, \u201cbut that doesn\u2019t mean we want to be owned by the US.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cOf course, it\u2019s very emotional for all of us, for people living up in Greenland and for people living in Denmark,\u201d said Rasmussen, 61, who is a former Danish prime minister and experienced diplomat. He noted Denmark\u2019s centuries-long relationship with the US and history of fighting alongside the Americans, including in Afghanistan, where Denmark lost more troops than any other US ally as a proportion of its population. \u201cIt is not easy think innovatively about solutions,\u201d he added, \u201cwhen you wake up every morning to new threats.\u201d<\/p>\n
New year, new read. Save 40% off an annual subscription this January.<\/p>\n \u201cWe agreed to disagree,\u201d Rasmussen concluded. But that is not a sentiment Trump has ever been known to express.<\/p>\n That morning, even before the meeting, Trump reiterated his stance in a social media post, declaring that the US \u201cneeds Greenland for the purpose of National Security\u201d and that it was \u201cvital for the Golden Dome [missile defence shield] that we are building\u201d. If the Americans did not take control of the territory, he insisted, \u201cRUSSIA OR CHINA WILL, AND THAT IS NOT GOING TO HAPPEN!\u201d Anything less than having Greenland \u201cin the hands of the UNITED STATES\u201d was \u201cunacceptable.\u201d (In fact, a forcible US takeover of Greenland, which would shatter Nato, would be a strategic gift to Russia and China and likely weaken America\u2019s regional security capabilities<\/a>.)<\/p>\n Shortly after the talks got underway, the official White House account on X posted a cartoon of two sled dog teams with Greenlandic flags contemplating two different paths ahead \u2013 one leading towards the White House and clear blue skies, the other towards dark storm clouds, lightning bolts and the Russian and Chinese flags. The accompanying caption read, confusingly: \u201cWhich way, Greenland man?\u201d<\/p>\n These do not seem like the actions of a president who will be content to \u201cagree to disagree\u201d.<\/p>\n Denmark and Greenland, too, are clearly not prepared to trust the territory\u2019s future to the prophesied working group. As their diplomats went into battle in Washington, Demark\u2019s ministry of defence announced that it was immediately bolstering its military presence in Greenland. An advance command had already arrived in the territory\u2019s capital, Nuuk, on 12 January to prepare the way for a larger contingent of troops. The deployment was framed as part of an exercise to strengthen Nato\u2019s footprint in the Arctic in response to \u201cgeopolitical tensions.\u201d<\/p>\n Shortly afterwards, Sweden\u2019s prime minister announced that a small contingent of Swedish military officers was en route to Greenland at Denmark\u2019s request. Norway, Germany, France, the Netherlands, and Canada all confirmed that they would also send small, but symbolic, numbers of troops.<\/p>\n This is a smart, and sadly necessary response. On the one hand, Nato allies can show that they take Trump\u2019s purported security concerns seriously and demonstrate that if his pursuit of Greenland is genuinely motivated by fears over Russian and Chinese encroachment, the most effective solution is to work within their existing alliance. At the same time, deploying European and Canadian troops to Greenland, if only, for now, as part of an exercise, complicates the calculus for a president who does not like to do hard things and would then have to weigh the prospect of a military confrontation\u00a0with America\u2019s oldest and closest allies<\/a> rather than a bloodless fait accompli.<\/p>\n Perhaps fittingly, the exercise is known as Operation Arctic Endurance, as Denmark and its allies now seek to outlast Trump\u2019s current obsession with gaining control of Greenland and deter him taking an irreversible step. \u201cIf the sovereignty of a European ally were affected, the cascading consequences would be unprecedented,\u201d French president Emmanuel Macron reportedly told his cabinet on 14 January. He vowed that France would \u201cact in full solidarity with Denmark and its sovereignty.\u201d<\/p>\n Copenhagen is similarly underlining its resolve if Trump ultimately declines Rasmussen\u2019s invitation to agree to differ. Pressed as to whether Danish soldiers would fight back against an American military assault as he announced the latest deployment, Denmark\u2019s defence minister refused to be drawn on hypothetical scenarios. But he confirmed that a standing order from 1952 remains in effect for all Danish troops: \u201cIf you are attacked, you must defend the Kingdom.\u201d<\/p>\n![](\"https:\/\/dl6pgk4f88hky.cloudfront.net\/2021\/09\/TNS_master_logo.svg\"){kind=logo}
<\/a><\/p>\n