In a significant diplomatic development, United States Secretary of State Marco Rubio announced on Wednesday that he will be meeting with Danish officials next week. This high-stakes meeting comes against the backdrop of escalating tensions over long-standing US interest in acquiring Greenland, a move that has sparked a severe transatlantic crisis and raised existential questions about the future of the NATO alliance.
Danish Ultimatum: Greenland Takeover Means End of NATO
The simmering conflict reached a boiling point when Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen issued a stark warning on Monday. She declared that a US attempt to take over Greenland would mean the end of the NATO military alliance. "If the United States decides to attack another NATO country, then everything would stop — that includes NATO and therefore post-World War II security," Frederiksen stated, as reported by DW.
This statement frames the potential US action not as a real estate transaction but as an attack on a fellow NATO member. Greenland is an autonomous territory within the Kingdom of Denmark. Frederiksen's comments underscore the profound breach of trust such an act would represent, threatening to unravel the foundational security architecture that has governed the West since 1949.
Trump's NATO Skepticism and the Coercive Playbook
The current crisis is deeply intertwined with former and potential future President Donald Trump's contentious relationship with NATO. Throughout his political career, Trump has expressed deep skepticism about the alliance, chastising members for not meeting defence spending targets and questioning America's commitment to defending Europe.
During the 2024 campaign, Trump reiterated he would not protect "delinquent" NATO members failing to spend 2% of GDP on defence. His defence secretary, Pete Hegseth, later emphasised a strategic pivot, stating the US was no longer "primarily focused" on defending Europe. While a June NATO summit temporarily eased tensions after allies agreed to raise spending to 3.5% of GDP by 2035, the underlying fissures remained.
Analysts, cited by Times magazine, see the Greenland pressure as part of a familiar "coercive playbook." The US argues Denmark cannot secure the Arctic against Russian and Chinese threats, but European leaders counter that existing NATO frameworks already grant Washington extensive military access. This has fueled suspicions that the real US objective is territorial expansion, not enhanced security.
Irreparable Damage and a Wake-Up Call for Europe
Experts warn that the mere threat of one NATO member turning on another—even over a territory with under 60,000 people—inflicts severe damage on the alliance's credibility. Marion Messmer, a director at the Chatham House thinktank, stated these threats serve as a brutal wake-up call for Europe, which remains heavily dependent on US military capabilities, intelligence, and nuclear deterrence.
"If any European states harbour any illusions they can rely on US security guarantees, then this is the wake-up call we are not returning to that world," Messmer said. The continent's rearmament efforts are underway but will take years, leaving it vulnerable to coercion in the interim, as seen when Europe accepted punitive US trade tariffs to avoid provoking a withdrawal from Ukraine and NATO.
Technically, NATO's charter lacks a clear mechanism to expel a member, even one that attacks an ally. However, such an event would fundamentally destroy the mutual trust the 76-year-old pact is built upon. As Secretary Rubio prepares for his crucial meeting with Danish counterparts next week, the world watches to see if diplomacy can pull the transatlantic alliance back from the brink of an unprecedented crisis.
