U.S. escalates strategic claims on Greenland amid NATO talks Washington argues Greenland is vital for Arctic security and access to rare‑earth resources, keeping diplomatic channels open while hinting at possible forceful acquisition [1][2]. The White House meeting on Jan 15 failed to ease tensions, and U.S. officials continue to cite NATO interests as justification [2]. American leaders also threaten higher tariffs on European allies if a Greenland deal stalls [1].

Greenlandic government reaffirms sovereignty and rejects sale Prime Minister Jens‑Frederik Nielsen publicly stated the island “is not for sale,” insisting any cooperation must respect Greenland’s constitutional status and international law [2][1]. Nielsen called for dialogue rather than coercion, emphasizing peaceful partnership with the United States and other partners [2]. The stance follows a high‑level White House discussion that left fundamental disagreements unresolved [2].

Danish opposition MP declares invasion would trigger war Rasmus Jarlov, chair of Denmark’s defense committee, told CNN that a U.S. military incursion into Greenland would spark direct conflict between the two NATO allies [1]. He stressed Denmark’s commitment to defend Greenland, framing any invasion as an act of war [1]. Jarlov’s warning underscores the political risk of U.S. pressure on a Danish territory.

EU considers trade tools to counter possible U.S. tariffs European leaders, including Ursula von der Leyen, discuss deploying a “bazooka” trade measure and other tariffs in response to American economic threats [1]. The bloc signals a unified stance to protect member economies if the U.S. imposes punitive duties linked to Greenland negotiations [1]. Such measures aim to deter further U.S. coercion while preserving transatlantic trade ties.

Greenlandic populace overwhelmingly opposes U.S. annexation Polls show the 57,000‑strong population largely rejects becoming part of the United States, preferring either continued Danish association or eventual independence [1][2]. While a minority favors closer ties with NATO, the majority view U.S. acquisition as undesirable [1][2]. Public sentiment adds domestic pressure on Greenland’s leaders to maintain autonomy.