Donald Trump wants to take Greenland - and the White House has confirmed that all options are on the table, including the use of force.
While a military operation is just one of a range of economic and political options being considered, since it would constitute an attack by one NATO member on another, such a move would represent a nightmare scenario for the NATO alliance, likely leading to existential crises.
Trump has repeatedly stated that Greenland is vital to US national security, claiming without evidence that it is 'covered with Russian and Chinese ships all over the place.'
Defense analysts suggest that a swift operation to capture Greenland could be executed with relative ease, yet the ramifications would be monumental.
Despite the geographical size of Greenland, its population is just around 58,000, primarily concentrated in the capital, Nuuk. Without a national military, the responsibility for defense falls to Denmark, which maintains limited resources. However, Denmark has increased defense spending in the Arctic and North Atlantic regions recently.
The potential operation could unfold using the existing Pituffik facility in Greenland, which has served as a military base since World War II. Danish security expert Hans Tito Hansen describes how the US might conduct such an operation, focusing on airborne units supported by naval assets, indicating that resistance would likely be minimal.
Nonetheless, several former officials express skepticism that military action would be considered, citing severe implications for US-European alliances and international law violations.
On the other hand, the prospect of buying Greenland appears complicated by legal obstacles. While the US administration may prefer a purchase, Greenland has adamantly stated it is not for sale, and such transactions require Congressional approval.
Furthermore, polls indicate that Greenlanders, while favoring independence from Denmark, do not wish to join the US. Reports suggest that US efforts may focus more on influencing local sentiments rather than outright annexation.
While Trump's ambition for Greenland may be viewed through the lens of national security and strategy, experts warn that ignoring Greenlanders' wishes and international law could trigger far-reaching consequences, minimizing the likelihood of successful outcomes.
