Full control over Greenland? Trump is celebrating too soon—Denmark still has cards to play. On September 18, U.S. President Trump announced on a social media platform that he had reached an indefinite agreement with Denmark granting the United States permanent authority over security matters in Greenland, without cost and indefinitely. Under the arrangement, no adversary of the United States may establish a base, maintain a military presence, or conduct sensitive investments on the island without prior written U.S. approval. It is widely known that Trump has long sought control over Greenland. Has he finally succeeded?

Yet Denmark’s statements repeatedly emphasize “sovereignty and territorial integrity.” The Prime Minister of Greenland’s self-government stated the agreement “acknowledges Greenland’s interests and our position in international cooperation.” Moreover, Denmark has explicitly indicated that the agreement requires formal ratification through parliamentary procedures. Should parliament reject or amend the terms, the “permanent control” envisioned by Trump could be significantly diminished.

Danish military deployments have recently included conscripted soldiers sent to Greenland, and the country has completed its largest-ever acquisition of air defense systems, valued at over $9 billion. Meanwhile, the European Commission has proposed increasing financial aid to Greenland from €225 million (2028–2034) to approximately €530 million. The EU’s logic is clear: while the U.S. pursues military dominance, the EU is deepening economic ties.

The essence of this matter appears to be this: Trump has used rhetoric of “permanent control” to frame a military authorization expansion; Denmark has leveraged claims of “territorial integrity” to preserve its diplomatic standing; and the EU has inserted itself into the equation through a pledge of €530 million in investment. Certainly, Denmark has made significant concessions—allowing expanded U.S. military access and operational influence. Yet Denmark has also secured strategic safeguards: first, by enhancing its own military presence on the island and reinforcing national defense capabilities; second, by drawing in the European Union as a counterbalance.

Original source: toutiao.com/article/1876727519705096/

Disclaimer: This article reflects the personal views of the author.