After days of threats of military intervention and tariffs, US President Donald Trump walked off the ledge by announcing that a framework had been reached for a deal with the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) over Greenland’s future.
The announcement followed his speech at the annual World Economic Forum (WEF) meeting in Davos, Switzerland, on Wednesday (January 21). Negotiators from the US and Europe will now hammer out the details of the deal.
The American President has argued that US control of Greenland would secure critical resources (the island is estimated to have enormous oil and gas reserves, as well as troves of rare-earth minerals such as cobalt, graphite, and lithium). Additionally, it would expand the US military’s reach in the Arctic and would challenge and circumscribe Chinese and Russian influence in a region key to American national security.
But this entire episode has several important takeaways and sheds light on the behaviour of the Trump administration, which has just completed a year in power. These learnings could be useful for similar future episodes stemming from the US.
How Trump seeks to get his way, in 6 steps
First, Trump always dials up the rhetoric and makes a public spectacle of the matter at hand, even for sensitive international issues. His threats and bullying tactics on Greenland, through posts on Truth Social and statements to the press, had stunned many around the world — most importantly, the Europeans.
He adopted a similar playbook for dealing with Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelenskyy last year in the Oval Office, when he — along with Vice President JD Vance — had publicly berated the Ukrainian President. Many were struck by Trump’s threatening behaviour, with statements such as “You don’t have the cards”.
For Trump, this was deliberately performative, and that is exactly how he raises the stakes.
Story continues below this ad
Second, the expected course of action follows, and those at the receiving end of Trump’s threats and tirades huddle together. After the Zelenskyy episode, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer met with the Europeans and formed the “Coalition of the Willing”, which included most NATO members and partners who had been supporting Ukraine against Russian aggression. They met several times in different European capitals to discuss a strategy.
In Greenland’s case, as well, the Europeans started talking to each other to back Denmark’s Prime Minister Mette Frederikkson, since Greenland is an autonomous region of the Danish Kingdom. And, be it French President Emmanuel Macron or German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, all of the leaders backed Denmark’s sovereignty.
Then comes an attempt at standing up to the US President. In Greenland’s case, the European allies, seven countries including France and Germany, sent a small contingent of troops to Greenland as a gesture of solidarity to defend Greenland against any military adventurism by the Americans.
Similarly, Europe stepped up their defence supplies to Ukraine last year — as the US dithered and dilly-dallied over its support — and even paused defence and intelligence support to the US for a while.
Story continues below this ad
Such actions have been matched by public statements. Just like the Danish PM had said that “Greenland is not for sale”, Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney’s speech backing Greenland’s sovereignty got the loudest applause at Davos, and his framework of calling out the bully got him a standing ovation. This was seen by Trump, who warned Carney publicly to watch out for his statements next time, since he said, “Canada lives, because of the US”.
Fourth, the most important step, is talking to Trump himself. The US President likes to be wooed and pursued by his adversaries, even if their framing as such may be largely imagined or perceived.
The Coalition of the Willing spoke to the US President repeatedly. The European leaders swallowed their pride, went to the Oval Office and sat across the table with the US President to back Zelenskyy.
In that vein, NATO Secretary General and former Dutch PM Mark Rutte played the role of the intermediary in Greenland’s case. Earlier this week, Trump posted a screenshot of a text conversation with Rutte, who said he would highlight his work on Ukraine and Gaza in Davos, and added that he was committed to finding a “way forward” on Gaza.
Story continues below this ad
And, just like Finland’s President Alexander Stubb had developed a rapport with Trump by playing golf for hours, Rutte had defended Trump’s language against Iran and Israel last year, saying, “Daddy has to sometimes use strong language to get them to stop.”
All of this resulted in Rutte being successful in talking to him, and Trump announced that both of them had “formed the framework of a future deal with respect to Greenland and, in fact, the entire Arctic Region,” without offering any details. He added, “This solution, if consummated, will be a great one for the United States of America, and all NATO Nations.”
Fifth, Trump is now closer to acquiring the rights to Greenland, without having to use force. He first came up with the idea of purchasing Greenland during his first term in 2019, which was dismissed as a fantasy by many. At the time, Brussels, Copenhagen, or Greenland’s capital, Nuuk, didn’t take the threat seriously. But, now, after having threatened military intervention and tariffs, he has moved closer to securing the rights of military expansion and mining natural resources. In the case of Ukraine, the Oval Office blow-up led to Europe stepping up its commitments and funding to Ukraine, which was an issue that Trump had frequently raised.
So, what Trump has now accomplished is the following: the Americans do not have to “take” Greenland by invading a NATO ally, by buying a sovereign territory or by a referendum in Greenland. Instead, he can get the rights to explore, mine and base his military through “essentially, a big real estate deal”.
Story continues below this ad
Sixth, the impact of this saga on the world order is chilling. He has shown world leaders, especially those of the major powers — be it Chinese President Xi Jinping or Russian President Vladimir Putin — what is possible through coercion, that consent doesn’t matter, and capitulation is the end goal. New Delhi will also be watching the turn of events.
Carney summed it up accurately when he said, “Every day we are reminded that we live in an era of great power rivalry. That the rules-based order is fading. That the strong do what they can, and the weak suffer what they must.”