Olga Lautman writes:

If the United States were to use military power against allied territory, it would bring the post–WW II security order to an end, collapse NATO from within, and hand Russia the biggest geopolitical victory it has never been able to secure on the battlefield, while placing the alliance on a path where American forces could, for the first time, find themselves in direct confrontation with NATO troops. I wrote about Greenland yesterday and will continue to focus on it precisely because Trump’s threats must be taken literally and understood as policy, not dismissed as rhetoric, spectacle, or bargaining tactics.

Greenland is Danish territory, and Denmark is a NATO member. Any attempt by the United States to coerce, seize, or militarily pressure Greenland would immediately raise fundamental questions about NATO’s core obligation of collective defense. That reality is now being acknowledged openly by European governments. Earlier today, Johann Wadephul, Germany’s foreign minister, stated that Greenland belongs to Denmark and that, because Denmark is part of NATO, Greenland necessarily falls under the alliance’s defense framework, adding that any need to strengthen protection would have to be discussed within NATO. Finally, Europe is waking up to the reality of the threat. Statements of this kind are not routine diplomacy, and NATO officials do not publicly raise questions about defending allied territory unless the risk is being taken seriously at the highest levels.

France echoed the same position, reiterating its support for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Denmark and Greenland and stating plainly that borders cannot be changed by force, underscoring that Trump’s threats are now being treated in Europe as a challenge to basic principles of international law rather than a bilateral dispute.

This concern did not emerge overnight. Over the summer, Denmark summoned U.S. diplomats following reports that individuals linked to Trump were engaged in covert influence operations inside Greenland. According to reporting, those activities included identifying politically sympathetic figures, compiling lists of critics, and gathering material intended to portray Denmark as exploitative or illegitimate in U.S. media. The pattern mirrors tactics long used in Russian influence operations, where internal divisions are deliberately amplified to weaken cohesion, undermine trust, and soften resistance ahead of operations. [Continue reading…]