Wednesday 07 / January / 2026
Is US President Donald Trump setting his sights on Greenland once again? 2026 has barely begun and Trump has already attacked Venezuela, kidnapped its disputed leader Nicolas Maduro and has renewed threats against several other sovereign territories — including Denmark's autonomous territory Greenland.
Denmark: US 'has no right to annex' Greenland
Concern in Europe has grown following a recent social media post by Katie Miller, the wife of senior White House official Stephen Miller, and an interview Trump gave The Atlantic.
In it, the US president repeated his long-standing claim: "We do need Greenland, absolutely. We need it for defense."
On Sunday, Denmark's Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen rejected the remarks outright.
"It makes absolutely no sense to talk about the US needing to take over Greenland," she said. "The United States has no right to annex any of the three countries in the Danish Kingdom."
This is not the first time Trump has floated the idea of annexing Greenland. He's offered to buy it more than once and has not ruled out military force either. But the renewed rhetoric comes at a time of heightened geopolitical tension, raising questions about how Europe would respond if words turned into action.
Greenland is an autonomous territory within the Kingdom of Denmark — and Denmark is a NATO ally of the United States. Any attempt to annex the island would effectively end the transatlantic alliance, says Jacob Funk Kirkegaard of the Peterson Institute for International Economics.
In January 2025, a poll showed that a majority of Greenlanders, about 56%, want independence from Denmark. But it also showed that joining the United States is favored by barely anyone – only 6% voted yes.
What does Trump want in Greenland?
Trump has framed his interest as a matter of national security, claiming Greenland is "surrounded by Russian and Chinese ships."
That assertion is false, as both Kirkegaard and Michael Paul of the German think tank Stiftung Wissenschaft und Politik (SWP) told DW.
Greenland does, however, possess vast untapped natural resources, including oil and critical minerals — a similarity it shares with Venezuela. But Paul argues the issue goes beyond raw materials.
"Both Greenland and Denmark are open to greater American involvement," he says. "Just a year ago, Greenland's minister for mining wrote in The Washington Post that without more US investment, Greenland would increasingly have to turn to other investors, even China."
Nor is the issue primarily about military access. Denmark has already increased its military presence around the island, and the United States could do the same within existing agreements.
"If Trump wanted to have more US troops in, bringing them in would not be a problem," Kirkegaard notes. "There is a joint defense treaty with the United States and Denmark."
Instead, Kirkegaard argues Trump's motivation appears more symbolic than strategic.
"The reality is that he seems to have concluded he wants to make America bigger on the map," he says. "It's not rational — and it's something only Congress or the Supreme Court can block."
What can the EU do to protect Greenland?
The European Union has long struggled to strike a balance between preserving transatlantic ties and asserting its own strategic autonomy. Following Trump's latest remarks, EU officials said on January 5 that the bloc "upholds universal principles of national sovereignty and territorial integrity, all the more so if a member state is threatened."
No concrete measures were announced.
"If Trump decided to annex Greenland by force, there is very little anyone could do in the short term," Kirkegaard told DW. "That's true for Greenland, for Denmark, and for the EU."
For now, diplomacy remains Europe's main tool. EU officials say no formal talks with Washington are planned, but Kirkegaard argues Brussels' most effective channel would be unofficial outreach to the US Congress. Any annexation — or major military action — would still require congressional approval. Kirgegaard said, European leaders could make clear what is at stake: the collapse of NATO, the closure of US bases in Europe, and potential sanctions on US companies operating in the EU.
Is Venezuela a warning sign?
The events in Venezuela offer two lessons. First, the Trump administration did not inform Congress in advance of its operation against Maduro — a move critics see as testing the limits of presidential power. Second, the EU once again reacted cautiously, calling for respect for international law while stopping short of condemning its most important ally.
The case of Venezuela underscores just how unpredictable the US president can be. As 2026 gets underway, European leaders are bracing for a difficult year — one in which their transatlantic balancing act may become even harder to sustain.
