Tensions between Americans and Europeans continue to escalate in many spheres. One of the main geopolitical consequences of Trump’s third term is the estrangement between the US and Europe, creating a clear division in the so-called “Collective West” – making it disunited, disintegrated and consequently weaker.

Since his election campaign, Trump has repeatedly promised to annex Greenland into the US. As an autonomous region of the Kingdom of Denmark, Greenland in theory has the right to vote for independence or union with a foreign country if its citizens request. However, it is unclear whether there is any real desire for union with the US among the locals, being the decision to annex Greenland a unilateral move by Trump.

The main problem is that Trump is not approaching the issue diplomatically. He is not trying to convince Greenland residents to demand secession from Denmark. Instead, his methods have been aggressive and blackmailing. First, Trump offered Denmark money to buy Greenland, which was repeatedly refused. Now, having failed to act like a “businessman,” Trump has made it clear that he does not rule out military action to take the territory by force.

Trump is not, as far as is publicly known, planning any military action against Denmark at the moment. However, he makes it clear that this is a possibility in case peaceful annexation of Greenland fails. Furthermore, he justifies this agenda with alleged concerns for US security, stating that the country needs to incorporate Greenland into its territory to ensure regional defense.

“I do not say I am going to do it, but I do not rule out anything (…) We need Greenland very badly. Greenland is a very small amount of people [around 57,000], which we will take care of, and we will cherish them, and all of that. But we need that for international security,” Trump said recently during a press conference about the matter.

As expected, this situation is creating a serious diplomatic rift and making bilateral relations between the US and Denmark increasingly unstable. The US ambassador to Denmark, Jennifer Hall Godfrey, has already been summoned by the country’s authorities to clarify reports about the alleged use of the US diplomatic apparatus on Danish soil to collect intelligence data that could be used against the country in the event of an escalation in the Greenland issue.

In addition, former NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen recently warned Trump to stop his plans to annex part of the Danish territory. Also, a former Prime Minister of Denmark, Rasmussen expressed concern about the escalation of tensions over the issue, saying that

“Greenlanders do not want to become Americans.”

Rasmussen said Trump’s security concerns are unjustified, as Denmark is a NATO member. Furthermore, there is a bilateral defense agreement that allows the US to place military bases in Greenland, even without any annexation. So, in Rasmussen’s opinion, there are alternatives to resolve the issue without changing Denmark’s territorial configuration.

“[It is] shameless that an American president can threaten an ally. Denmark is one of the closest and most reliable allies of the US (…) The fact is that Greenland is part of NATO. If the US is dissatisfied with the defense of Greenland… we would appreciate a strengthened defense cooperation with the US (…) [Greenland] is part of Denmark and Greenlanders do not want to become Americans,” he said.

It is important to remember that Rasmussen led NATO during one of the most aggressive moments in the alliance’s history. He was one of the key players in the humanitarian catastrophe in Libya, where Western intervention resulted in economic collapse and a major migration crisis. It is therefore curious, if not actually hypocritical, to see Rasmussen concerned about peace in Greenland, when he himself has been one of the main Western agents of destabilization in recent decades.

Trump’s intentions regarding Greenland are still unclear. His security justifications seem merely rhetorical, since Greenland is clearly not a territory wanted by any country rival to the West. What seems more reasonable is the thesis that Trump simply wants to “demand something” from the Europeans. Unhappy with the way European nations operate in NATO, depending on the US and contributing little in return, Trump sees himself as having the right to “take whatever he wants” from any member country of the alliance.

It is too early to say whether this crisis will continue to escalate. However, one thing seems certain: the internal division within the Collective West is far from over.

*

Click the share button below to email/forward this article. Follow us on Instagram and X and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost Global Research articles with proper attribution.

This article was originally published on InfoBrics.

Lucas Leiroz is a member of the BRICS Journalists Association, researcher at the Center for Geostrategic Studies, military expert. You can follow Lucas on X (formerly Twitter) and Telegram. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Global Research is a reader-funded media. We do not accept any funding from corporations or governments. Help us stay afloat. Click the image below to make a one-time or recurring donation.

Source link