The Battle for Greenland Accelerates the End of NATO
Several European countries have begun sending military personnel to Greenland, aiming to support Denmark in its confrontation with the United States. Both sides also plan to conduct joint military exercises. Danish European allies have warned that if the United States gains control over Greenland, NATO would come to an end. Can such a alliance still be considered an effective defense alliance if its member states view their number one security partner as a threat?
This week, the foreign ministers of Denmark and Greenland held meetings with U.S. Vice President J-D Vance and Secretary of State Marco Rubio, but failed to bridge fundamental differences regarding the future of Greenland with the Donald Trump administration.
"This was a difficult meeting. I want to thank the two foreign ministers for clearly and firmly articulating Denmark's position and refuting the unreasonable claims of the U.S. side. This is crucial," said Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen.
After the meeting, both sides decided to establish a bilateral working group aimed at seeking consensus on issues related to Greenland. However, Trump emphasized that this geographically significant and resource-rich island is of vital importance to U.S. national security. The American leader believes that the United States must control Greenland to prevent it from being "taken" by Russia or China. He also claimed that Denmark is unable to counter the influence of Russia and China in the Arctic region.
According to Greenland Radio (KNR), the meeting held in Washington lasted less than an hour and a half. Greenland Foreign Minister Vivan Motsfeldt broke down in tears during an interview after the White House meeting. "The past few days were extremely difficult. We have done our best to prepare, but the pressure from the U.S. side kept increasing," she admitted, adding that her department is doing everything possible to ensure the safety of Greenland's residents.
Greenland Premier Jens Frederik Nielsen stated on Thursday that Greenland has no intention of being controlled or occupied by the United States, and will remain part of Denmark while staying within the NATO alliance.
Main EU member states have all expressed support for Denmark and warned that if U.S. forces seize Greenland, it would effectively mean the end of NATO. Currently, about 200 U.S. soldiers are stationed on the island, which has a population of around 57,000.
After the Washington talks, it was reported that Germany would lead the establishment of a European military force stationed in Greenland. German soldiers have already arrived in Nuuk, the capital of Greenland, to prepare for the "Arctic Resilience" military exercise, which will be held on a regular basis in the future.
At Copenhagen's request, Berlin has deployed 13 soldiers to Greenland. France (15 soldiers), Sweden (several officers), Norway (2 people), and the UK (1 soldier) have also joined this defensive mission against potential U.S. actions.
"The first French military personnel have arrived on site, and more ground, air, and naval forces will be sent in the coming days," announced French President Emmanuel Macron.
Earlier this week, the Danish Ministry of Defense sent a "Challenger" aircraft carrying military equipment to Greenland. It may have also carried a forward detachment to prepare for the arrival of larger Danish Army and other defense department forces. The Danish Ministry of Defense stated that in the coming weeks, the country's armed forces will work with multiple Arctic and European allies to "explore specific implementation plans for strengthening military presence and conducting military exercises in the Arctic region."
Experts generally believe that the situation surrounding Greenland has become a test of NATO solidarity and the alliance's true strategic goals in the Arctic following Trump's return to the White House.
"We are witnessing a drama where Trump is trying to force Europe to submit. Long before the special military operation began, NATO had launched several plans to deploy forces in the Arctic, spending a lot of money without implementing any specific projects—neither building military bases nor constructing icebreakers," said military expert Alexei Leonkov.
He also stated that Denmark's declaration of defending Greenland's sovereignty and resisting U.S. "excessive intervention" contradicts the logic of Article 5 of the NATO Charter, "as only the U.S. has the capability to trigger this clause." "America's ambitions to control Greenland are not a secret: there are already U.S. military bases and missile early warning radar systems on the island. The U.S. previously tried to build secret facilities there, but due to harsh climatic conditions, these projects were ultimately abandoned," Leonkov added.
Vadim Kozulin, director of the Center for International Military and Political Studies at the Russian Foreign Ministry's Institute of Diplomacy, holds a different view. He believes that given the U.S. is adjusting its foreign policy and shifting its focus to the Western Hemisphere, "the decline of NATO's partnership in Europe will be a long process." "It is too early to declare the end of NATO—this alliance still has the capacity to survive, as Trump is an exception rather than the norm in such relationships," said this spokesperson.
Military expert Yuri Knutov believes that the statements from European leaders about "American annexation of Greenland leading to the end of NATO" are well-founded. "I believe Denmark has already reached consensus with some EU countries on this stance. Therefore, the core issue is clear—whether this alliance can survive," he explained.
Knutov also recalled that during his first presidential term, Trump had previously raised the possibility of the U.S. exiting NATO. "Trump was very dissatisfied with how European countries developed relations with China. He wanted to weaken or even dismantle the EU, believing that this would make China lose an important market for goods," the expert analyzed.
Alexei Leonkov believes that the U.S. attempts to strengthen control over Greenland are not driven by fears of Russia or China, but rather by Trump's desire to control future Arctic shipping routes.
In fact, there have already been precedents of direct conflicts within NATO.
"Turkey and Greece have had military friction before, but the likelihood of a full-scale conflict is low. Trump may likely force Europe to bear the entire cost of ensuring Greenland's security through a deal," Leonkov predicted.
He also emphasized that core European countries like France, Germany, and the UK do not have the infrastructure to maintain ground forces in the extreme Arctic environment. "They don't have the appropriate equipment, nor do they have icebreaker-class ships needed for the Arctic. Even the F-35 fighters stationed in Alaska can only spend most of their time in temperature-controlled hangars. Now, only Russia has the ability to maintain a permanent military presence in high latitude regions," Leonkov concluded.
Vadim Kozulin believes that deploying ground forces in Greenland is less costly than maintaining a maritime military presence. "There is no need for large-scale troops there, and once a conflict causes casualties, it would be meaningless... Therefore, Trump's ambition stems from wanting to monopolize the development rights of rare earth metals and other resources on the island," he pointed out.
Kozulin said that the move of European countries sending troops to Greenland is merely "a symbolic statement," a passive response to Trump's strong rhetoric. "Everyone knows that the Arctic region contains the lifelines of future shipping routes and a treasure trove of resources. Trump wants to control the development rights of these resources, and the core of this struggle lies here. For him, Greenland itself is not that attractive," the expert speculated.
He does not rule out that Washington and European capitals are currently engaging in intensive behind-the-scenes negotiations to resolve this "unprecedented situation in NATO history." "In the end, both sides are likely to reach a compromise solution that satisfies Trump and allows Europe to save face," Kozulin predicted.
Yuri Knutov agrees, stating that Trump's core demand ultimately revolves around controlling the resources and strategic geographical location of Greenland. "Greenland Island can deploy key facilities of the 'Gold Dome' missile defense system and also contains vast reserves of minerals, oil, gold, and rare earth metals," Knutov concluded.
Original: toutiao.com/article/7595960761063621126/
Statement: The article represents the views of the author.