Would Trump's Seizure of Greenland Be the End of NATO?

US Vice President JD Vance and Secretary of State Marco Rubio will meet with Danish and Greenlandic foreign ministers at the White House on Wednesday to discuss President Donald Trump’s hopes of making “a deal” to acquire the autonomous territory within the Kingdom of Denmark.

The anticipated meeting follows Trump’s remark that the United States will “have” Greenland “one way or the other,” even if that requires going about it the “hard way.” Thomas Dans, Trump's Arctic commissioner, added on Tuesday that the United States could act to annex Greenland within “weeks or months.”

Distinguished Nonresident Fellow and former US permanent representative to NATO Ambassador Julianne Smith recently joined a group of former top officials, including Council President Emeritus Ivo Daalder, in publishing a statement outlining how a US seizure of Greenland could “fracture” NATO.

She spoke with the Council’s Christina Colón about how the alliance is approaching Trump’s threats and what could come out of Wednesday’s meeting.

This interview has been lightly edited for length and clarity.

If Trump were to acquire Greenland—either through a deal or by force—would this be the end of NATO?

I do think the United States’ desire to try "get Greenland" is really creating an existential crisis for the NATO alliance. This alliance was created about 75 years ago to ensure that all of the members could pitch in and provide for each other's security—Article 5: “An attack on one is an attack on all.” And the alliance is not designed to cope with incidents where allies are talking about using military force against one another.

There have been a few incidents in the past, particularly between Greece and Turkey, where they have been at odds. But this chapter, where the most powerful and influential member of the NATO alliance is talking about invading or taking or infringing on another country's sovereign territory, does present a unique one-of-a-kind dilemma for the alliance.

It is perhaps a bit surprising that NATO has made no statement on the situation. Why is that the case? 

I'm not particularly surprised by the fact that the NATO alliance has not released any statement on America's stated desire to secure control of Greenland. The way in which the alliance operates is often behind closed doors. Allies meet almost on a daily basis in multiple formats, including in the North Atlantic Council, where all allies sit around a big round table to discuss that week's agenda.

I suspect there's a lot of conversations going on across the alliance, both with the United States and Denmark and representatives from Greenland, but also many without the United States. I think there are members of the alliance right now—in fact, I know that there are members of the alliance right now—that are having some quiet conversations about what steps they may consider pursuing if the United States were to coerce Greenland into allowing the United States to own its territory or, in a worst-case situation, use military force to take over Greenland.

Greenlandic Prime Minister Jens-Frederik Nielsen and four party leaders said in a statement last week that people residing in the territory “want to be Greenlanders”—not Americans or Danes. What would a truly independent Greenland mean for strategic alliances?

The people of Greenland, for quite some time, have expressed a very strong desire for independence, and that obviously does not bode well for the existing relationship that Greenland has with Denmark. However, those two entities—both part of the Kingdom of Denmark—have been in conversations for quite some time about Greenland's desire to, over the medium- and long-term, seek greater independence.

Seeking greater independence for the people of Greenland is extraordinarily difficult because they have deep commercial ties to both the European Union and the country of Denmark. They also have a big portion of their welfare system provided by the government of Denmark. You cannot simply snap your fingers in Greenland and declare independence tomorrow, and the people of Greenland are the first people to tell you that.

Because they are seeking independence, there is a question, however, about as they move toward greater independence, do they want to deepen economic ties with the United States through perhaps a free association agreement or some other bilateral agreement whereby the United States would provide some economic assistance or even greater security for the people of Greenland. And that's what is going to be on the agenda when a delegation from both Greenland and Denmark travel to Washington this week to meet with the highest levels of the Trump administration, including Vice President JD Vance and Secretary of State Marco Rubio.

Disagreements over migration, defense, and the war in Ukraine have created divisions within the European Union. Could a dispute over Greenland splinter Europe? 

There are countless disputes across the European continent on every subject imaginable. There are 27 different members of the European Union and 32 separate members of the NATO alliance. As one might imagine, the people of Estonia, the people of Portugal, and the people of Canada or the United States don't always see eye to eye. These countries have different histories, they have different geography, and different relationships with countries around the world. So, whether you're talking about Ukraine or the US desire to go after Greenland, obviously there will be a variety of different perspectives across Europe.

However, I think in this case, most countries in the European Union—and I expect most in the NATO alliance—would agree that if the United States were to take an aggressive stance toward the people of Greenland and make a sudden or rash move that was not part of some sort of diplomatic agreed framework, I think many would find that incredibly troubling and would call into question their bilateral relationship with the United States and many of their multilateral relationships with the United States, including the EU-US relationship and NATO's relationship with the United States.

What do you anticipate will come out of Wednesday’s meeting? 

I think it's hard to predict what the outcome of this week's meeting will be between the delegations from Greenland and Denmark and the United States.

I think there is one scenario where the people of Denmark and Greenland come to the United States prepared to set some new terms for the relationship between the United States and Greenland. As it turns out, thanks to a treaty from the 1950s, the United States actually has the ability to increase its military presence in Greenland as early as next week if it's so desired. We have not seen signs that the United States is going to make that kind of move, but there are plenty of ways in which the United States could move out through a diplomatic framework.

However, there's a darker scenario and that is that the United States leaves the meeting frustrated, that they feel that the Danish and Greenlanders are not taking their concern seriously, and the United States ends up making some sudden or rash move that's unexpected and not agreed upon by the three parties.

We will have to wait and see how this plays out in the days ahead, but this will be a hugely consequential meeting and an important one to follow.

What should we be paying attention to in the weeks ahead? 

You want to look first and foremost at the results of this week's meeting. You also want to look for any announcements coming out of the Pentagon about a change in US force posture. This is an administration that has talked many times about reducing its military footprint in Europe. If we saw something that countered that instinct, and we saw a push to increase the US military's presence in Greenland, I think we would want to monitor and analyze that very closely.

We'll be looking at public statements coming out of not only Copenhagen but of Greenland and many Nordic allies that care deeply about this particular issue. Many of them have been quite vocal in warning the United States not to take Greenland by force. And lastly, we will want to watch what comes out of Brussels and the European Union. My sense is that EU officials are preparing a list of measures that they could take in retaliation against the United States. We'll have to see what kind of public statements we pick up on in the days and weeks ahead.