U.S. President-elect Donald Trump delivered an expansionist speech targeting both allies and potential adversaries. He proposed that the boundaries of U.S. power should extend to include Canada and Greenland, a Danish territory, and stretch southward to the Panama Canal.
Trump's suggestions of redrawing international borders—by force if necessary—have particularly provoked reactions in Europe.
His rhetoric clashes with the argument that European leaders and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky are trying to present to Russian President Vladimir Putin.
The responses of many European leaders, who have grown accustomed to expecting the unexpected from Trump and noting that his actions often contradict his words, have been marked by caution. Some leaders have adopted a "nothing to see here" stance rather than vigorously defending Denmark, an EU member state.
Nonetheless, analysts warn that such words could damage U.S.-European relations before Trump’s second term begins on January 20.
Diplomatic reactions from various European officials emphasized their belief that Trump does not plan to send troops to seize Greenland.
European governments heavily rely on the United States for trade, energy, investment, technology, and defense cooperation to ensure security.
Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni remarked, “I believe we can rule out the possibility of the U.S. using force in the coming years to annex territories it desires.”
German Chancellor Olaf Scholz cautiously added, “Borders should not be redrawn by force,” without directly mentioning Trump.
Ukrainian President Zelensky sought to pressure the incoming Trump administration earlier this week to continue supporting Ukraine. He stated, “No matter what happens in the world, everyone wants to ensure that their country is not erased from the map.”
Since Putin sent troops across the border into Ukraine in 2022, Zelensky and his allies have been fighting at great cost to uphold the principle that the international order established after World War II must remain intact—that powerful countries cannot simply devour others.
The foreign ministers of the UK and France both stated that they do not anticipate the U.S. invading Greenland.
However, French Foreign Minister Jean-Noël Barrot described Trump’s remarks as a wake-up call.
“If the question is whether we’ve entered an era where survival of the fittest rules, my answer is yes,” Barrot said.
Greenland's Prime Minister Múte Bourup Egede stated that its people do not want to become Americans but are open to increased cooperation with the U.S.
Greenland, a semi-autonomous region in the Arctic, is not part of the EU. However, its 56,000 residents are considered EU citizens as part of Denmark.
Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen described the U.S. as “our closest ally... and we must stand together.”
European security analysts agree that there is no real possibility of Trump using military force against Denmark, a NATO ally. However, they expressed deep concerns nonetheless.
Analysts warned of upcoming disruptions in transatlantic relations, international norms, and the Western military alliance, citing growing tensions between the U.S. and Canada, a NATO member, over Trump’s repeated suggestions that Canada should become a U.S. state.
Flemming Splidsboel Hansen, a foreign policy and Russia expert at the Danish Institute for International Studies, said, “Frankly, I cannot recall a similar incident where an ally—in this case, the most important ally (the U.S.)—threatened Denmark or another NATO member state.”
Hansen expressed fears that NATO could unravel even before Trump’s inauguration.
### Security Concerns as a Possible Motivation
Diplomats and analysts see a common thread in Trump’s focus on Canada, the Panama Canal, and Greenland: securing resources and waterways to strengthen U.S. power against potential adversaries.
In Paris, analyst Alex Frangoul Alves explained that Trump’s rhetoric “is all part of his approach: making America great again.”
She pointed out that Greenland’s territory contains rare earth metals vital for advanced and green technologies, while China dominates the global supply of these critical materials. This dominance is viewed as a security risk by the U.S., Europe, and other nations.
Alves, who specializes in U.S. policies at the German Marshall Fund, stated, “Any policy Washington adopts is viewed through the lens of competition with China.”
Observers warned of the risks inherent in Trump’s proposed methods.
Security analyst Alexander Khara noted that Trump’s claim that “we need Greenland for national security purposes” echoes Russian President Putin’s remarks about Crimea, the strategic Ukrainian peninsula in the Black Sea, when Russia seized it by force in 2014.
Khara, director of the Center for Defense Strategies in Kyiv, described the implication that borders could be flexible as a “very dangerous precedent.”
“We are transitioning from the old system based on norms and principles... toward more conflicts, chaos, and uncertainty,” he warned.
