Central to European objections is the principle of sovereignty. Greenland enjoys self-government under the Kingdom of Denmark, with its own parliament and administrative institutions. European leaders view Trump’s approach as undermining this arrangement and, by extension, the international legal norms that support the territorial integrity of states and territories. From a European perspective, cooperation—rather than coercion—is the appropriate framework for managing shared strategic challenges, whether in the Arctic, the Baltics, or the Mediterranean. By equating partnership with weakness, the Trump administration risks eroding trust and making collective defense less effective.
The dispute over Greenland also illustrates the limits of coercive diplomacy. European countries, while militarily and economically smaller than the United States, are united in their commitment to NATO and to maintaining stable transatlantic relations. Public threats, sanctions, and social media pressure may generate headlines, but they do little to advance actual strategic security objectives when applied to allies who prioritize legal norms, partnership, and sovereignty. Moreover, such tactics can harden resistance and encourage coordination among European states, as seen in the joint statements and emergency consultations convened in response to the Greenland threat. Continue reading…
