Denmark and Greenland Seek Rubio Meeting as U.S. Reasserts Greenland Interest
Updated (3 articles)
Denmark and Greenland formally request meeting with Rubio The Danish foreign minister Lars Løkke Rasmussen and Greenlandic minister Vivian Motzfeldt posted a joint request on Greenland’s government website to meet U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio after earlier attempts failed [1][2][3]. The appeal follows President Trump’s renewed public statements that the United States needs Greenland to counter Chinese and Russian Arctic activity [1][2][3]. Copenhagen frames the meeting as urgent diplomatic damage control to clarify Washington’s intentions [2][3].
White House repeats “U.S. military is always an option” The White House reiterated that “U.S. military is always an option,” prompting alarm among NATO partners [1][2][3]. Trump and advisers argued the island’s strategic value justifies a possible military posture, citing rising Chinese and Russian presence in the Arctic [1][2][3]. European leaders condemned the phrasing as coercive toward a trusted ally [1][2][3].
European allies warn Greenland takeover would jeopardize NATO Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen warned that a U.S. annexation would amount to the end of NATO, while France, Germany, Italy, Poland, Spain and the United Kingdom issued a joint statement that Greenland “belongs to its people” [1][2][3]. The coordinated response frames the dispute as a breach of alliance norms and territorial sovereignty [1][2][3]. Allies stressed that any aggressive move would undermine collective security commitments [1][2][3].
Denmark expands U.S. base access but retains termination right Denmark’s parliament approved a bill in June widening U.S. military access to Danish soil, building on a 2023 agreement that already allows broad use of Danish airbases [2][3]. Danish officials said the legislation includes a legal lever to terminate the arrangement if Washington attempts to annex Greenland [2][3]. The United States already operates the Pituffik Space Base in northwestern Greenland, providing strategic capability without formal annexation [2][3].
Analysts say annexation adds no security value, raises norm concerns Military analysts in Denmark argue that formal annexation would provide no additional security benefit because existing U.S. access already meets strategic needs [2][3]. They warn that such a move would erode international legal norms and damage NATO cohesion [1][2][3]. Recent U.S. military action in Venezuela has amplified European fears that Washington could employ sudden force in the Arctic [1][3].
Sources (3 articles)
-
[1]
The Hindu: Denmark and Greenland seek meeting with Rubio after White House repeats U.S. interest in Greenland: Highlights the diplomatic request, the “U.S. military is always an option” comment, European solidarity, recent Venezuelan action, and bipartisan U.S. Senate rebuke .
-
[2]
WBNS: Denmark and Greenland seek meeting with Rubio after U.S. reiterates interest in Greenland: Emphasizes the expanded U.S. base access bill, Denmark’s right to terminate agreements, and analysts’ view that annexation offers little strategic gain .
-
[3]
King5: Denmark and Greenland ask to meet Rubio after U.S. reiterates interest in Greenland: Focuses on the unanswered prior meeting requests, the same European warning, the legal leverage in the base‑access law, and the Venezuelan precedent heightening European anxiety .
Timeline
2017 – Trump’s first public proposal to acquire Greenland – President Donald Trump first floats the idea of the United States taking over Greenland, arguing that the Arctic island could bolster U.S. strategic posture against rival powers. The proposal sets a precedent that resurfaces in 2026 and frames the current diplomatic clash as a revival of a long‑standing U.S. ambition [1].
2023 – U.S.–Denmark defense agreement grants broad base use – The United States and Denmark sign a 2023 pact that gives U.S. forces extensive access to Danish airbases and to the Pituffik Space Base in north‑western Greenland, establishing a legal foothold that already satisfies most U.S. operational needs in the Arctic [2].
June 2025 – Denmark widens U.S. military access – Denmark’s parliament passes a bill expanding U.S. military access to Danish soil, building on the 2023 agreement. Danish officials, including Foreign Minister Lars Løkke Rasmussen, stress that the legislation includes a “legal exit” clause that would let Denmark terminate the arrangement if Washington attempts to annex Greenland [2].
Jan 4 2026 – Trump renews Greenland proposal, calling it “strategic” – In a press briefing, President Trump tells reporters, “It’s so strategic right now,” reiterating his claim that the United States needs Greenland to counter rising Chinese and Russian activity in the Arctic [1].
Jan 5‑6 2026 – U.S. military action in Venezuela raises alarm – The United States conducts a limited military operation in Venezuela, prompting European leaders to warn that Washington’s willingness to use force abroad could extend to the Arctic and intensify concerns over any coercive move toward Greenland [1].
Jan 7 2026 – White House says “U.S. military is always an option” – The White House publicly states that the “U.S. military is always an option,” a remark that fuels diplomatic friction and leads NATO allies to label the rhetoric as coercive toward a partner nation [1][2].
Jan 7 2026 – Denmark and Greenland formally request a meeting with U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio – Danish Foreign Minister Lars Løkke Rasmussen and Greenlandic Minister Vivian Motzfeldt post a request on Greenland’s government website, noting that earlier attempts to secure a sit‑down with Rubio failed and emphasizing the urgency of “damage‑control” diplomacy [1][2][3].
Jan 7 2026 – European leaders issue joint sovereignty statement – France, Germany, Italy, Poland, Spain and the United Kingdom join Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen in a joint declaration that Greenland “belongs to its people,” warning that any U.S. takeover would “amount to the end of the NATO military alliance” [1][2][3].
Jan 7 2026 – U.S. lawmakers and French foreign minister rebuke the rhetoric – Senators Jeanne Shaheen and Thom Tillis, co‑chairs of the bipartisan Senate NATO Observer Group, denounce the proposal as coercive and urge respect for treaty obligations. French Foreign Minister Jean‑Noël Barrot tells Rubio that a “Venezuela‑style operation” would jeopardize NATO support [1][2].
Jan 7 2026 – Analysts argue annexation adds no security value – Danish military analysts explain that the United States already enjoys full operational access to the Pituffik Space Base and other facilities, so formal annexation would provide little strategic benefit while eroding international legal norms [2][3].