U.S. military seizure of Greenland could spell NATO’s collapse, commissioner warns
COPENHAGEN — A senior European official warned that a U.S. move to seize Greenland by force would spell “the end of NATO,” as Denmark and multiple European capitals rallied behind the self-governing Arctic territory and urged Washington to abandon coercive rhetoric.
European Commissioner for Defence and Space Andrius Kubilius said European Union member states would be obliged to come to Denmark’s assistance if faced with military aggression. “I agree with the Danish Prime Minister (Mette Frederiksen) that it will be the end of NATO, but also among people it will be very, very negative,” he said at a security conference in Sweden.
- Advertisement -
Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen called the dispute with Washington over Greenland “a decisive moment,” telling Danish political leaders that the stakes extend beyond the island’s immediate future. In a Facebook post, she added: “We are ready to defend our values — wherever it is necessary — also in the Arctic. We believe in international law and in people’s right to self-determination.”
The remarks came after President Donald Trump again suggested using force to secure control of Greenland, an autonomous territory of the Kingdom of Denmark long viewed as strategically vital for North Atlantic security and increasingly coveted as melting sea ice opens new Arctic routes and exposes mineral riches.
NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte said allies are considering “next steps” to collectively bolster safety in the High North. “Currently, we are discussing the next step to that, how to make sure that we give practical follow up on those discussions,” Rutte told reporters at a news conference in Croatia. “We are working on the next steps to make sure that indeed, we collectively protect what is at stake here.”
Germany and Sweden publicly backed Denmark following Trump’s latest comments. Before meeting U.S. counterpart Marco Rubio, German Foreign Minister Johann Wadehpul said in Iceland that “security in the Arctic is becoming more and more important” and is “part of our common interest in NATO.” He added that “the future of Greenland must be decided by the people of Greenland and Denmark.”
German Finance Minister Lars Klingbeil said Berlin and allies were strengthening Arctic security “together” rather than against one another. Swedish Prime Minister Ulf Kristersson condemned “threatening rhetoric” from the United States and warned that any forced takeover of mineral-rich Greenland would be “a violation of international law and risks encouraging other countries to act in exactly the same way.”
European nations have scrambled to coordinate a response after the White House said this week that Trump wanted to buy Greenland and refused to rule out military action. Leaders of seven European countries, including France, the United Kingdom, Germany and Italy, signed a letter Tuesday stating it is “only” for Denmark and Greenland to decide the territory’s future.
Trump has argued that control of the island is crucial for U.S. national security amid rising Russian and Chinese activity in the Arctic. NATO Supreme Allied Commander General Alexus Grynkewich told a Swedish conference there was “no immediate threat” to NATO territory, but noted the Arctic’s strategic importance was growing fast. He said discussions on Greenland were underway at the North Atlantic Council and described them as “healthy dialogues.”
Grynkewich added that Russian and Chinese vessels have been seen patrolling together on Russia’s northern coast and near Alaska and Canada, seeking greater access to the Arctic as ice recedes due to global warming.
Greenland was a Danish colony until 1953, gained home rule 26 years later and is contemplating further loosening of ties with Copenhagen. Polls indicate that Greenland’s population strongly opposes a U.S. takeover.
For Copenhagen and its allies, the confrontation is not only about sovereignty but also about the rules that govern an increasingly contested Arctic. As the region opens, European leaders say, the answer must be collective security and international law — not unilateral force.
By Abdiwahab Ahmed
Axadle Times international–Monitoring.