UK Weighs Sending Troops to Greenland as Trump Threatens Annexation of Danish Territory
Britain in talks with European allies to deploy NATO forces to Arctic island as President doubles down on “hard way” takeover threats
British defense officials confirm discussions underway with Germany, France on potential military mission to deter Russian aggression
LONDON — The United Kingdom confirmed Saturday it’s in active discussions with European allies about deploying military forces to Greenland, describing the talks as “business as usual” despite the extraordinary circumstances: protecting a NATO ally from potential American aggression.
Transport Secretary Heidi Alexander, speaking on behalf of the British government, declined to rule out sending UK troops to the Danish autonomous territory, framing any deployment as deterring “Russian aggression in the Arctic Circle” rather than confronting the United States directly.
The revelation comes as European leaders scramble to respond to President Donald Trump’s escalating rhetoric about seizing Greenland “the easy way or the hard way,” with NATO military planners now developing options for an alliance mission on the strategically vital Arctic island.
NATO Allies Develop Greenland Defense Strategy
UK Leads European Response to Trump’s Threats
British officials recently met with German and French counterparts to begin preparations for a possible NATO mission, according to The Telegraph. The plans, still in early stages, could involve British soldiers, Royal Navy warships, and Royal Air Force aircraft being deployed to help secure the territory.
Multiple options are under consideration, ranging from full-scale troop deployments to more limited approaches including:
- Time-limited military exercises in Greenland
- Enhanced intelligence sharing arrangements
- Capability development initiatives
- Redirected defense spending toward Arctic security
- Rotating naval and air force presence
Any mission would likely operate under NATO’s banner, separate from existing alliance operations in the Baltic states and Poland, according to defense analysts familiar with the planning.
“We share President Trump’s view – Russia’s growing aggression in the High North must be deterred, and Euro-Atlantic security strengthened,” a British government source told The Telegraph.
Trump Doubles Down on Greenland Acquisition
President Threatens “Hard Way” If Deal Fails
President Trump intensified his pursuit of Greenland Friday, telling reporters at the White House that if he cannot acquire the territory “the easy way,” then he will have to “do it the hard way.”
The comments came days after Trump reportedly instructed the Pentagon to prepare contingency plans for military action to seize Greenland, sending shockwaves through NATO and raising fundamental questions about the future of the 75-year-old alliance.
White House Confirms Military Option on Table
White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt stated that “utilizing the U.S. military is always an option” to acquire the Arctic territory, further escalating tensions with European allies.
Deputy White House Chief of Staff Stephen Miller went further, telling CNN that “nobody is going to fight the United States militarily over Greenland” and declaring that “obviously, Greenland should be part of the United States.”
Trump has repeatedly claimed America needs Greenland for national security purposes, citing concerns about Russian and Chinese activities in the Arctic. However, Greenland already hosts Pituffik Space Base (formerly Thule Air Base), which the US operates in coordination with Danish authorities.
Strategic Importance of Greenland
Why the Arctic Island Matters
Greenland’s significance extends far beyond its geography. The world’s largest island possesses:
Strategic Military Position:
- Guards part of the GIUK Gap (Greenland, Iceland, United Kingdom), where NATO monitors Russian naval movements in the North Atlantic
- Critical air and sea route control
- Early warning radar systems
Natural Resources:
- Large deposits of rare earth minerals needed for computers, smartphones, batteries, and renewable energy technologies
- Potential offshore oil and natural gas deposits
- Copper and nickel reserves
Climate Access:
- Melting Arctic ice opening new shipping routes
- Increased accessibility to previously unreachable resources
Denmark and Greenland Reject US Claims
“Greenland Is Not for Sale”
Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen sounded the alarm: “If the US chooses to attack another NATO country militarily, then everything stops, including NATO and thus the security that has been established since the end of the Second World War.”
Greenland’s Prime Minister Morten Aagaard has stated clearly that the island does not want to be American or Danish, but seeks independence. Leaders of five political parties in Greenland’s parliament issued a joint statement Friday rejecting any suggestion the territory would become American.
Danish Foreign Minister Lars Løkke Rasmussen said that Greenland could become independent if its inhabitants wanted it, but emphasized it would not become a US state.
European Strategy: Calling Trump’s Bluff?
Analysts See Potential Diplomatic Solution
Justin Crump, chief executive of risk analysis firm Sibylline, suggested European nations may be attempting to “call Trump’s bluff” by proposing robust NATO security arrangements for Greenland.
“He is likely weighing the unity and resolve of European nations,” Crump said, noting that allies could use enhanced NATO protection to test whether security concerns are truly driving Trump’s interest – or whether Greenland’s vast natural resources are the real motivation.
A British government source emphasized: “NATO discussions on reinforcing security in the region continue, and we would never get ahead of those, but the UK is working with NATO allies to drive efforts to bolster Arctic deterrence and defense.”
Republican Lawmakers Break Ranks with Trump
Congressional Opposition Growing
Senate Majority Leader John Thune reportedly told press he doesn’t view “military action being an option” in Greenland and flagged the idea as “not something that anybody is contemplating seriously.”
House Speaker Mike Johnson said during a DC news conference Wednesday: “All this stuff about military action and all that, I don’t even think that’s a possibility. I don’t think anybody’s seriously considering that.”
Senator Thom Tillis issued a bipartisan statement alongside Democratic Senator Jeanne Shaheen of New Hampshire, stating: “When Denmark and Greenland make it clear that Greenland is not for sale, the United States must honor its treaty obligations. Any suggestion that our nation would subject a fellow NATO ally to coercion or external pressure undermines the very principles of self-determination that our Alliance exists to defend.”
EU Considers Retaliatory Sanctions
Economic Countermeasures in Development
The European Union is drawing up plans for sanctions on US companies should Trump reject the offer of a NATO deployment, according to The Telegraph. Measures under consideration include:
Technology Sector Sanctions:
- Restrictions on Meta, Google, Microsoft, and X (formerly Twitter)
- Potential operational limitations across European markets
- Data privacy enforcement actions
Financial Sector Actions:
- Restrictions on American banks and financial institutions
- Potential limits on US financial services in Europe
Military Response:
- A more extreme option under consideration would be expulsion of US military forces from European bases
- This would deny Washington key staging posts for Middle East operations and elsewhere
- Such action would represent an unprecedented rupture in transatlantic relations
UK’s Delicate Diplomatic Position
Starmer Walks Tightrope Between Allies
Prime Minister Keir Starmer reportedly held a late-night phone call with Trump to discuss Greenland, making clear that the territory’s sovereignty is for Greenlanders and Danes to decide. However, details of the conversation remain closely guarded.
The situation presents an extraordinarily difficult challenge for Britain. As one of NATO’s leading military powers and America’s closest traditional ally, the UK must balance its commitment to collective defense with the reality of its deep dependence on US security cooperation.
Questions About UK Military Capacity
Despite Britain’s close ties with northern European nations through the Joint Expeditionary Force – a UK-led coalition of Nordic and Baltic nations – some former military leaders have expressed doubts about Britain’s capacity to effectively defend the High North.
The UK military has faced years of budget constraints and force reductions, raising questions about whether British forces could sustain significant operations in the harsh Arctic environment alongside existing commitments to Ukraine, NATO’s eastern flank, and global counterterrorism operations.
British Parliament Addresses Concerns
During a Commons exchange, Scottish National Party MP Dave Doogan raised concerns about High North security, citing reported US worries over Greenland’s vulnerability to Russian and Chinese activity.
Defense Secretary John Healey responded by affirming that Prime Minister Starmer had been “very clear” that Greenland’s sovereignty is not at stake and that its security is guaranteed by all 32 NATO member states.
“Its sovereignty is not at stake, and it is defended by being part of NATO,” Healey told lawmakers. “Any future for Greenland is a matter for the Greenlanders and the citizens of Denmark.”
Denmark’s Defense Spending Under Scrutiny
Copenhagen Ramps Up Arctic Investment
Denmark failed to meet NATO’s 2 percent GDP defense spending guideline for years, spending approximately 1.3 percent through most of the 2010s, reaching 1.65 percent by 2023.
This came despite Denmark’s combat deployments in Iraq and Afghanistan, where 50 Danish soldiers died fighting alongside American forces.
However, in 2024, Denmark finally reached the 2 percent threshold, and the Danish parliament approved significant defense increases, committing to reach 3.22 percent of GDP by 2025. At the 2025 NATO summit, Denmark committed to the alliance’s new target of 5 percent over the next decade.
Officials in the Trump administration have cited Denmark’s past spending shortfalls when questioning Copenhagen’s commitment to the alliance and its ability to defend Greenland.
NATO in Unprecedented Crisis
Alliance Unity Under Extreme Strain
Trump’s pursuit of Greenland has plunged NATO into what many analysts describe as its gravest crisis since the alliance’s founding in 1949. The situation represents the first time a NATO member has openly threatened to seize territory from another alliance member.
Experts told CNBC that a U.S. attempt to take Greenland by force would likely be “unopposed” militarily, but such a move would mark the end of NATO.
“What European military commander is going to open fire on a U.S. troop transport coming into Greenland?” said Edward R. Arnold, a senior research fellow at British defense think tank Royal United Services Institute. “That would start an inter-NATO war, potentially. And the U.S. knows that.”
Historical Context: NATO Members in Conflict
While NATO has weathered disagreements before – including over the Vietnam War, the 2003 Iraq invasion, and Greek opposition to Kosovo intervention – the alliance has never faced a situation where one member threatened military action against another’s territory.
The Greenland crisis represents uncharted territory for an alliance built on the principle of collective defense and shared democratic values.
American Public Opposes Force
Polls Show Strong Opposition to Military Action
US citizens overwhelmingly oppose using military force to take control of Greenland, according to a YouGov poll. Just 7% of US adults said they supported using force to annex Greenland, with 72% opposed.
The findings suggest a significant disconnect between Trump administration rhetoric and American public opinion on the issue.
What Happens Next: Uncertain Path Forward
Key Questions Remain Unanswered
As European allies develop contingency plans for Greenland and Trump continues his annexation rhetoric, several critical questions remain:
Immediate Concerns:
- Will Trump actually follow through with military action, or is this negotiating posture?
- Would European NATO members truly deploy forces to defend Greenland from American aggression?
- Can the alliance survive this unprecedented challenge to its unity?
- What role will Denmark play in requesting or rejecting allied military assistance?
Diplomatic Off-Ramps:
Some analysts suggest Trump may ultimately accept a face-saving arrangement where increased NATO presence in Greenland allows him to claim credit for strengthening Arctic security without actually annexing the territory.
US Secretary of State Marco Rubio has signaled a preference for negotiations to US lawmakers, indicating that the military threat is primarily being used to force Denmark to sell Greenland.
Others fear the president’s rhetoric has gone too far to walk back without significant concessions from European allies, potentially setting the stage for the most serious transatlantic crisis since World War II.
Expert Analysis: Russia and China Factor
Geopolitical Implications Beyond NATO
Li Haidong, a professor at the China Foreign Affairs University, told media that the “current US administration’s recent series of threats to annex Greenland will create deep rifts within NATO, and the seeds of division have already been sown.”
“Washington’s actions are undermining the unity and cohesion of the alliance,” Li said, predicting that “disputes between the US and Europe within NATO over Greenland will grow increasingly acute.”
Some experts warn that a US invasion of Greenland would be “doubly bad for Europe by playing into Putin’s hands in Ukraine,” as it would validate “the idea that larger powers can have a free hand in what they regard as their own back yard”.
UK Government’s Careful Messaging
Framing as Russian Deterrence
The British government’s carefully calibrated response – emphasizing Russian threats rather than American ones – reflects the tightrope Prime Minister Starmer must walk between alliance obligations and the special relationship with Washington.
A UK government source stated: “The UK will continue to work with allies – as we always have – on operations in our national interest, protecting people back at home.”
As one British defense official put it privately: “We’re discussing how to defend a NATO ally from another NATO ally. That sentence alone tells you how unprecedented and dangerous this situation has become.”
Timeline of Trump’s Greenland Push
From First Term to Present
August 2019: Trump first proposed purchasing Greenland during his first term, calling it “a large real estate deal.” Danish PM Mette Frederiksen called the idea “absurd,” leading Trump to cancel his planned state visit to Denmark.
January 2025: Upon reelection, Trump renewed interest, stating “the ownership and control of Greenland is an absolute necessity.”
March 2025: Vice President JD Vance toured Pituffik Space Base in Greenland.
January 2026: Trump intensifies rhetoric following Venezuela operation, tells reporters he’ll take Greenland “the easy way or the hard way.”
January 11, 2026: UK confirms discussions with European allies about potential troop deployment.
Impact on US-Europe Relations
Transatlantic Alliance at Crossroads
The tension was on display in Paris this week, when representatives from 35 countries, including the US, discussed Ukraine’s post-war security. European leaders found themselves in an impossible position: needing US support for Ukraine while opposing American threats against Denmark.
A reporter asked Britain’s Prime Minister Keir Starmer: “What value do these US security commitments have on the very day that, at the highest levels of government in Washington, they are talking about seizing the territory of a fellow NATO member?”
Starmer prevaricated, pointing to an earlier statement of solidarity with Denmark, unwilling to jeopardize Washington’s involvement in the Ukraine peace process.
Bottom Line: Alliance at Breaking Point
The crisis over Greenland represents a fundamental test of NATO’s relevance and viability in the 21st century. For the first time in the alliance’s 75-year history, member states are being forced to contemplate the unthinkable: defending against one of their own.
With Europe needing US military and diplomatic support to rebuff Russia, Trump’s renewed threats against Greenland have put allies in a bind: how to keep the US out of Greenland, but invested in Ukraine?
As discussions continue in London, Berlin, Paris, and Copenhagen about potential NATO deployments, one thing remains clear: the outcome of this crisis will define European-American relations – and possibly NATO itself – for generations to come.
The stakes couldn’t be higher. As Danish Prime Minister Frederiksen warned, an American attack on Greenland would mean “everything stops” – including 80 years of transatlantic security cooperation that has kept Europe at peace.
This is a developing story. Updates will be added as the situation evolves and more information becomes available.
Key Facts: Greenland at a Glance
Location: Arctic, between Europe and North America
Status: Autonomous territory of Denmark
Population: 57,000
Size: World’s largest island (836,330 square miles)
Government: Self-governing with own parliament
US Military Presence: Pituffik Space Base (formerly Thule Air Base)
NATO Status: Covered under Denmark’s NATO membership
Resources: Rare earth minerals, copper, nickel, potential oil/gas reserves
Related Coverage
- Trump Orders Pentagon to Prepare Greenland Invasion Plans
- NATO Members Rally Behind Denmark as Trump Threatens Force
- Republican Senators Break with Trump Over Greenland Threats
- What US Military Action in Greenland Would Mean for NATO
- Denmark’s Defense Buildup: Can Copenhagen Protect the Arctic?
Last updated: January 11, 2026 | Follow developments on this story as NATO faces its most serious crisis in 75 years
Another News :
Social Connect
Â
