Donald Trump’s Greenland ambitions rattle Europe as leaders push for diplomacy

LONDON — For Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen of Denmark and leaders across Europe, the threat of violence from their American allies was shocking.

Stephen Miller, one of President Donald Trump’s closest aides, was asked Monday to rule out the use of military force to seize Greenland, a semi-autonomous territory of Denmark. Miller not only refused. He also questioned Greenland’s status, ignored its historical ties to Denmark and mocked the idea that Europe could stand up to US troops.

“The real question is, by what right does Denmark assert control over Greenland?” Miller said on CNN. “Obviously, Greenland should be part of the United States.”

Although Frederiksen had long taken Mr Trump’s threats seriously, Miller’s blunt comments blew apart what had been her yearlong effort to quietly talk the president out of his desire to control Greenland. They stunned a visibly frazzled Frederiksen and created a sense of near panic among her counterparts in Europe, according to interviews with more than a dozen diplomatic and military officials and others in several countries.

The comments by Miller, and the president’s earlier insistence that “we do need Greenland, absolutely,” crystallised the danger for Europe’s leaders, the officials said. They are now working behind the scenes to draft potential responses, including the idea of building up NATO forces to better counter Chinese and Russian influence, or even offering Mr Trump access to Greenland’s vast mineral deposits.

The emerging consensus is that they must find a way to avoid a damaging political confrontation with Mr Trump through negotiation. One concern expressed privately among European officials is that Greenland is not about security or economic resources, but about Mr Trump’s desire to “make America greater again,” as one European foreign minister said, and go down in history as having expanded US territory for the first time in decades.

Mr Trump was blunt about Greenland on Friday at the White House, saying, “I would like to make a deal the easy way, but if we don’t do it the easy way, we’re going to do it the hard way.”

Even for a Continent whose leaders have grown used to Trump’s repeated assault on long-standing alliances in Europe, the renewed targeting of Greenland left officials shaken, appalled and nervous, according to several of the officials.

It also left them far from united on how to respond. A statement of support for Denmark came Tuesday from six other European countries, not the entire 27-nation membership of the European Union. Privately, officials have disagreed about how aggressively to criticise Mr Trump because his help is critical to efforts to ending the war in Ukraine, which many European leaders view as a defining threat.

A direct challenge to Mr Trump is likely to produce an angry response, one European foreign minister said, but too weak a stance would be equally damaging.

Frederiksen has warned publicly that an American attempt to take Greenland by force would “mean the end of the NATO alliance.” And Denmark’s Defense Ministry said in a statement Friday that if Greenland were invaded, its soldiers would be allowed to shoot without waiting for instructions from superiors.

Jean-Noël Barrot, the French foreign affairs minister, said on French public radio that he did not believe Mr Trump would invade Greenland. When it comes to any form of intimidation, he added, Europe must “prepare ourselves to respond, to retaliate, and not to respond alone.”

Others in Europe urged calm, noting that Secretary of State Marco Rubio plans to meet with officials from Denmark in the coming days. Ursula von der Leyen, the president of the European Commission, said this past week that “cooperation is stronger than confrontation.”

There has been a push across Europe to dial back tough talk in the hopes that members of Congress in the United States, including Republicans, can persuade Mr Trump and his aides to back down, three European diplomats and a senior Western military official said.

Jesper Moller Sorensen, the Danish ambassador, has chronicled meetings with American lawmakers on the social media platform X. US Rep. Mike Flood, R-Neb., wrote after one meeting this past week that the ambassador “expressed an openness to discuss any measure that would enhance the security of the United States, while respecting the sovereignty of the Kingdom of Denmark.”

Little evidence has emerged that an invasion is imminent, several of the officials acknowledged. European leaders are still trying to figure out how real the threat is and exactly what Mr Trump’s goals are. They do not want to risk escalating the situation before they fully understand it.

Across Europe, the Greenland conversations began in earnest Tuesday morning, hours after Miller’s comments, when the leaders of many European countries had gathered in Paris to discuss ways to end the war in Ukraine. In Paris the following day, Polish, French and German foreign ministers talked again. And Thursday in Brussels, diplomats hashed out ideas at a meeting of the North Atlantic Council, NATO’s political arm. Ambassadors from across the 27 nations of the European Union heard a state of play on the situation Friday.

In between, officials across Europe traded phone calls and text messages.

European leaders have made a point of reassuring Frederiksen, who is normally blunt and strong-willed, about their support. The conversations have yet to lead to consensus on what to do if Mr Trump decides to make good on his threats.

One possibility under discussion is whether Denmark might offer to alter the legal status of Greenland without changing its ownership. In essence, as one official said, the United States could act in Greenland as if it owned it, but without doing so.

Greenlanders could, for example, vote for independence and then associate themselves with the United States for security and economic benefits, without becoming part of the United States. That would most likely require a significant economic offer to Greenland’s 56,000 or so citizens that would improve considerably from what Denmark currently provides them, which is estimated at some $1 billion a year.

“That would be the cleverest way, to offer a significant carrot,” said Jon Rahbek-Clemmensen of the Center for Arctic Security Studies at the Royal Danish Defense College.

Such a deal would not appear to satisfy Mr Trump. In an interview with The New York Times this past week, the president said that “ownership is very important.” He added: “That’s what I feel is psychologically needed for success. I think that ownership gives you a thing that you can’t do, whether you’re talking about a lease or a treaty.”

Another option that European officials are discussing is a significant buildup of NATO forces in Greenland to demonstrate to Mr Trump that the alliance is serious about countering Chinese and Russian activity in the Arctic.

At the North Atlantic Council meeting, officials weighed the possibility of a maritime exercise involving warships and icebreakers, one NATO ambassador said. It would be a sign of reassurance and also a symbol of allied commitment.

Whether to bolster Arctic security efforts has been a long-standing debate in NATO. Washington has pushed for more action for years. Canada, at least until recently under Prime Minister Mark Carney, has been reluctant to cede more responsibility to NATO. But if investing more military resources in Greenland could ease Mr Trump’s demands to seize the island, it will become a more pressing debate now, the NATO ambassador said.

Some European officials have raised the possibility of allowing the United States to expand its military presence on Greenland without having to acquire the island. Others have said Denmark could seek a deal to provide the United States with rare minerals from Greenland needed for high-tech and military manufacturing, something Mr Trump has expressed interest in.

Other suggestions, like establishing a permanent European base in Greenland, would be unlikely to get significant support among officials on the Continent. Several of the officials said it would be best to keep the security issue within NATO, thus involving the Americans.

“If Greenland has a security problem, the answer is not for the US to take over Greenland but work together with 31 allies,” said Ivo H. Daalder, a US ambassador to NATO under President Barack Obama.

European officials have also discussed how to show the United States that they are ramping up their financial commitment to Greenland and Arctic security, two diplomats and another European official said. The European Union has proposed a large spending increase as part of its next budget, for instance.

Mr Barrot, the French foreign affairs minister, rejected any sale of Greenland. He referred to the Louisiana Purchase of 1803, which occurred when Napoleon sold 828,000 square miles of land to the Americans in part to fund an ongoing war in Haiti, then one of its colonies in revolt.

“Greenland is not for sale, nor is it for the taking,” Mr Barrot said. “We are no longer in the era when one could buy or sell Louisiana.”

This article originally appeared in The New York Times.

© 2026 The New York Times Company