Trump’s next target? Danish Prime Minister: If the US “forcibly takes” Greenland, it would mean the end of NATO.

U.S. President Trump’s expansionist ambitions toward Greenland are pushing the transatlantic alliance to the brink of crisis. Danish Prime Minister Frederiksen warned that if the U.S. takes military action against this Danish territory, it will lead to the end of NATO and destroy the security system established since World War II.

According to the Global Times, following the U.S. airstrike on Venezuela and the forcible control of the country’s President Maduro and his wife, Trump said earlier on the 4th in a phone interview with The Atlantic that Venezuela may not be the last country to face U.S. intervention, and stated “We absolutely need Greenland.”

Then, aboard Air Force One, Trump gave a timetable: “We’ll consider the matter of Greenland in about two months. Let’s talk about Greenland again in 20 days.”

Frederiksen said bluntly in a media interview: "If the United States chooses to launch a military attack on another NATO country, then everything will be terminated, including NATO and the security system established since the end of World War II." Greenland’s Prime Minister Nielsen also said the U.S. statement was "completely unacceptable," demanding an end to pressure and fantasies of annexation.

Denmark’s tough response to U.S. threats

Trump views Greenland as essential to U.S. national security. According to the Global Times, he told reporters on the 4th: "Greenland’s strategic position is extremely important, from the perspective of national security, we need Greenland." He also claimed Denmark is unable to protect Greenland’s security.

The island is already home to the northernmost U.S. Air Force base and radar stations, used to detect missile threats and monitor space. Trump first raised the idea of buying Greenland during his first term in 2019. Since returning to the White House, he has intensified such remarks. Last December, a Danish intelligence agency for the first time classified the U.S. as a potential security risk.

On the 4th, Frederiksen issued a statement saying the U.S. has no right to annex any area that constitutes Denmark, and discussing the topic "the U.S. needs to take over Greenland" is "meaningless." She strongly demanded the U.S. stop its threats.

In her statement, Frederiksen pointed out: "The Kingdom of Denmark (including Greenland) is a NATO member, and is therefore protected by the alliance’s security guarantees. Currently, the Kingdom of Denmark and the United States have reached a defense agreement allowing the U.S. broad use of Greenland." She called on the U.S. to cease its threats against a historic close ally and to another nation and people.

Frederiksen told the media that she is "not a nervous person, nor naive, so I’m watching all developments on the map," adding she believes Trump "is serious." She said she had spoken with Trump by phone but refused to reveal the exact timing.

Former Trump adviser’s tweet sparks controversy

Before Trump’s latest statements, former Trump adviser and White House Deputy Chief of Staff Miller’s wife Katie Miller posted on social media on the evening of the 3rd an image of Greenland colored with the U.S. flag, captioned "SOON," hinting that the U.S. would "take" Greenland.

On social media on the 4th, Nielsen condemned Katie’s post as “rude.” He said: “Relations between countries and peoples are built on mutual respect and international law, not symbolic actions that disregard status and rights.” He also emphasized, “No need to panic, no need to worry. Greenland is not for sale, and our future won’t be decided by social media posts.”

Danish Ambassador to the U.S. Sørensen also responded with a post on the 4th, saying: “We demand full respect for Denmark’s territorial integrity.”

Risk warning and disclaimerThe market is risky, investment requires caution. This article does not constitute personal investment advice, nor does it take into account the specific investment objectives, financial situation, or needs of individual users. Users should consider whether any opinions, views, or conclusions in this article suit their particular circumstances. Investing based on it is at one’s own risk.