Trump
steps back from the brink on Greenland. But the damage has been done.
The
president’s effort to acquire Greenland, even with the threat of force off the
table, has changed the way allies see the U.S.
By Eli
Stokols and Diana Nerozzi
01/21/2026
03:34 PM EST
https://www.politico.com/news/2026/01/21/trump-greenland-military-deal-00739427
After two
weeks of escalating threats toward Europe, President Donald Trump blinked on
Wednesday, backing away from the unthinkable brink of a potential war against a
NATO ally during a speech at the World Economic Forum in Davos.
Trump’s
vow not to use military force to seize Greenland from Denmark eased European
fears about a worst-case scenario and prompted a rebound on Wall Street. And
his declaration hours later after meeting with NATO’s leader that he may back
off of his tariff threat having secured the “framework” of an agreement over
Greenland continued a day of backpedaling on one of the most daring gambits of
his presidency to date.
But his
continued heckling of allies as “ungrateful” for not simply giving the U.S.
“ownership and title” of what he said was just “a piece of ice” did little to
reverse a deepening sentiment among NATO leaders and other longtime allies that
they can no longer consider the United States — for 80 years the linchpin of
the transatlantic alliance — a reliable ally.
“The
takeaway for Europe is that standing up to him can work. There is relief, of
course, that he’s taking military force off the table, but there is also an
awareness that he could reverse himself,” said a European official who attended
Trump’s speech and, like others interviewed for this report, was granted
anonymity to speak candidly. “Trump’s promises and statements are unreliable
but his scorn for Europe is consistent. We will have to continue to show
resolve and more independence because we can no longer cling to this illusion
that America is still what we thought it was.”
Trump’s
abrupt about-face after weeks of refusing to take military intervention off the
table comes a day after Greenland shock waves sent global markets plunging,
wiping out over $1.2 trillion in value on the S&P 500 alone. The
president’s policy shift mirrored a similar moment in April, when he quickly
reversed sweeping tariffs after a market downfall tied to his policies.
If
Trump’s refusal to use the military to threaten Greenland and the U.S.’s NATO
allies holds, it would represent a win for administration officials such as
Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, who on Tuesday counseled the Davos set not to
overreact or escalate the fight with Trump, assuring concerned Europeans that
things would work out soon.
The
threat of force appeared to have the strong backing of deputy chief of staff
Stephen Miller, who offered the most forceful articulation of those desires in
an interview this month where he claimed that America was the rightful owner of
Greenland and insisted the “real world” was one “that is governed by force,
that is governed by power.”
But
Miller aside, most saw the threat of force as an attempt to create leverage for
an eventual negotiation. If Trump were to have pursued using military force,
there could have been pushback from his closest allies like Secretary of State
Marco Rubio and Vice President JD Vance, said a person close to the
administration and granted anonymity to describe the private dynamics.
“Do some
senior administration people talk to their best friends in conservative world
and media and basically say, ‘Yeah, I don’t know why we’re doing this?’ Sure,
but I think those are all in confidence,” the person said.
Increasingly,
Europeans have been voicing their growing fears aloud. When Trump arrived in
the snowy Swiss Alps Wednesday afternoon for this annual confab of business and
political titans, the West remained on edge after the president announced last
weekend that he intended to increase tariffs on several European countries that
had sent troops to Greenland for military exercises. As they contemplated the
fact that an American president was threatening the territorial sovereignty of
one ally and turning to economic coercion tactics against others, European
leaders strategized openly about retaliating in kind.
That
posture marked a major shift from Trump’s first year back in office, when
European leaders put up a fight but ultimately and largely accepted his terms —
NATO begrudgingly agreeing to spend more on defense, taking on all of the
financial burden for Ukraine aid and the European Union accepting a 15 percent
tariff on all exports to the U.S. — in order to keep the president from
breaking with the alliance and abandoning Ukraine.
But the
president’s brazen challenge to Denmark over Greenland and shocking disregard
for Europe’s territorial sovereignty amounted to a disruption that is orders of
magnitude more concerning. Demanding that Denmark, a steadfast NATO ally, allow
him to purchase Greenland — and, until Wednesday, holding out the prospect of
using military force to seize it — threatened to cross a red line for Europe
and effectively shatter 80 years of cooperation, upending an alliance structure
that America largely built to avoid the very kind of imperialistic conquest
Trump suddenly seems fixated on pursuing.
“We’ve
gone from uncharted territory to outer space,” said Charles Kupchan, the
director of European studies at the Council on Foreign Relations and a former
adviser to President Barack Obama. “This is not just strange and hard to
understand. It borders on the unthinkable, and that’s why you’re seeing a
different response from Europe than before Greenland was center stage.”
Trump’s
social media posts last weekend announcing that he intended to increase tariffs
on the European countries that had sent troops to Greenland for training
exercises drew harsh public responses from heads of state across Europe and
prompted a flurry of private phone calls and even text messages — some of which
the president shared on social media — urging him to work with them more
constructively to address security in the Arctic.
That
didn’t stop Trump on Wednesday from continuing to assert an intention to
acquire Greenland through negotiations, despite an overwhelming majority of
Greenlanders being opposed to living under U.S. control.
“Let’s
not be too cheerful on him excluding violence, as that was outrageous in the
first place,” said a second European official in Davos. “And his narrative on
Greenland is BS. It should be called out.”
Trump,
who met with European leaders to discuss Greenland on Wednesday afternoon,
suggested in his remarks that the U.S. acquiring the massive island between the
Arctic and North Atlantic was in the best interests of Europe as well as
America’s. “It’s the United States alone that can protect this giant, massive
land, this giant piece of ice, develop it and make it so that it’s good for
Europe and safe for Europe,” he said.
“You can
say yes, and we will be very appreciative, or you can say no and we will
remember,” Trump continued.
Those
words did not appear to fully allay the growing anxieties of democratic leaders
that the world is spinning in a new and frightening direction, away from
decades of relative peace and stability and back to a prewar era of global
conquest.
Canadian
Prime Minister Mark Carney, addressing Davos on Tuesday ahead of Trump’s
arrival, was emphatic in declaring that there is no going back. “Every day we
are reminded that we live in an era of great power rivalry,” Carney said. “That
the rules-based order is fading. That the strong do what they can, and the weak
suffer what they must.”
Calling
for democratic nations to take steps to lessen their reliance on the U.S. and
their vulnerability to pressure from this White House, Carney urged other
leaders to accept a new reality that, in his view, the longstanding postwar
order was already gone. “Let me be direct: We are in the midst of a rupture,
not a transition.”
Trump
made it clear on Wednesday that he saw Carney’s remarks, alluding to Canada’s
reliance on the U.S. and going as far to suggest that its safety continues to
depend on American defense technology. “They should be grateful to us,” he
said. “Canada lives because of the United States. Remember that, Mark, next
time you make your statement.” The implied threat, in a way, may have
underscored the Canadian leader’s point.
With
persistent threats of higher tariffs from the White House even after Trump
backed off his saber rattling over annexing the country, Canada has looked to
rebalance its trade relationships with other countries, including China, to
reduce its economic dependence on the U.S.
In
Europe, leaders may be following suit. Just last week, Brussels approved a
landmark free trade agreement with the Mercosur bloc of South American
countries, a long-sought deal that took on greater urgency in recent months to
provide Europe with a bulwark against Trump’s protectionism and coercive
economic measures.
There is
still hope in Europe that Trump will eventually accept something less than U.S.
ownership of Greenland, especially after his apparent walkbacks Wednesday on
the threats of tariffs and military force. That could include accepting a
standing offer from Denmark to boost America’s military presence on the island,
not to mention economic cooperation agreements to develop natural resources
there as climate change makes mineral deposits more accessible.
But
European leaders increasingly seem to accept that there are limits to their
ability to control Trump — and are looking to hedge their reliance on the U.S.
as urgently as possible.
Anders
Fogh Rasmussen, the former Danish prime minister and secretary general of NATO,
wrote this week that it’s time for Europe to shift its posture toward the U.S.
from one of close allies to a more self-protective stance defined by a stronger
military and reciprocal tariffs.
“Mr.
Trump, like Vladimir Putin and Xi Jinping, believes in power and power only,”
he wrote, likening the U.S. president to the leaders of Russia and China.
“Europe must be prepared to play by those same rules.”
Trump’s
threats against Denmark have obliterated the long-held view about the U.S.,
that after 80 years of standing up to imperialist conquerors from Adolf
Hitler’s Germany to Saddam Hussein’s Iraq, Washington would always be the tip
of the spear when it came to enforcing a world order founded on shared
democratic ideals.
Suddenly,
that spear is being turned against its longtime allies.
“The
jewel in the crown of our power and of our role in the world has always been
our alliance system,” said Jeremy Shapiro, a veteran of the State Department
under the President Barack Obama administration who is now a fellow at the
European Council on Foreign Relations in Washington.
Shapiro
noted that the U.S. has at times still employed hard power since the end of
World War II, especially in its own hemisphere. But overall, American foreign
policy has largely been defined by its reliance on soft power, which he said “
is much less expensive, it is much less coercive, it is much more moral and
ethical, and it’s more durable.”
Returning
to the law of the jungle and a world where larger powers gobble up smaller
ones, Shapiro continued, will make the U.S. more like Russia and China — the
two countries he claims threaten U.S. interests in Greenland — and weaker over
the long term.
“Moving
from our trusted methods to Putin’s methods is worse than a crime,” he said.
“It’s an idiocy.”

Sem comentários:
Enviar um comentário