<\/p>\n
In a speech<\/span> about annexing Greenland, President Donald Trump on Wednesday also appeared to announce plans for the United States to annex Iceland.<\/p>\n In a rambling and sometimes incoherent address at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, Trump announced U.S. designs on the Nordic island nation. \u201cUntil the last few days when I told them about Iceland, they loved me,\u201d Trump said of European leaders. \u201cWhat I\u2019m asking for is a piece of ice, cold and poorly located, that can play a vital role in world peace and world protection.\u201d He added that NATO is \u201cnot there for us on Iceland. \u2026 Our stock market took the first dip yesterday because of Iceland. Iceland\u2019s already cost us a lot of money.\u201d<\/p>\n White House spokespersons Karoline Leavitt, Taylor Rogers, and Anna Kelly all failed to respond<\/a> to repeated requests by email for clarification about whether the commander-in-chief meant to threaten Iceland or misspoke when he meant to say Greenland, a country that he has vowed to take by any means necessary<\/a>. Repeated calls to the White House press office also went unanswered.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n When a NewsNation reporter tweeted that Trump \u201cappeared to mix up Greenland and Iceland,\u201d Leavitt claimed the journalist had the facts wrong. \u201cHis written remarks referred to Greenland as a \u201cpiece of ice\u201d because that\u2019s what it is,\u201d Leavitt tweeted<\/a>.<\/p>\n In his remarks, Trump stated that \u201cAll the United States is asking for is a place called Greenland,\u201d suggesting his references to Iceland were mistakes.<\/p>\n In weeks of unhinged rhetoric about seizing Greenland, Trump has been clear that he is not interested in expanding U.S. access via a new pact that falls short of a takeover. He recently told the\u00a0New York Times<\/a>\u00a0that \u201cownership is very important.\u201d He continued, \u201cThat\u2019s what I feel is psychologically needed for success.\u201d Asked if he meant psychologically important for himself or the United States, Trump said his fixation on Greenland was personal: \u201cPsychologically important for me.\u201d<\/p>\n A 2025 survey found that\u00a085 percent of Greenlanders<\/a>\u00a0do not want to join the United States. Just 6 percent of respondents said they were in favor of an American takeover.<\/p>\n \u201cWe probably won\u2019t get anything unless I decide to use excessive strength and force where we would be frankly unstoppable. But I won\u2019t do that,\u201d Trump said during his World Economic Forum\u00a0speech. \u201cI don\u2019t have to use force. I don\u2019t want to use force. I won\u2019t use force.\u201d<\/p>\n On Wednesday afternoon, Trump wrote<\/a> on Truth Social that he had reached a \u201cframework of a future deal with respect to Greenland\u201d with Mark Rutte, the secretary general of NATO. Neither the White House nor the Danish Prime Minister\u2019s Office returned requests for comment on the substance of the proposed pact.<\/p>\n Trump\u2019s designs on Greenland were once treated as loose talk and frivolous<\/a>, if not farcical. Even after months of threats by the administration, allies still attempt to excuse his rhetoric.\u00a0\u201cWe take him seriously, not always literally,\u201d\u00a0House Speaker Mike Johnson said on Tuesday of Trump\u2019s fixation<\/a> about annexing Greenland. As such, there\u2019s reason to consider whether Trump\u2019s threats against Iceland are a trial balloon rather than merely the ramblings of a 79-year-old following a trans-Atlantic flight. (Before repeatedly mentioning Iceland during his Wednesday speech, Trump derided his aged presidential predecessor as \u201csleepy Joe Biden.\u201d)<\/p>\n The Trump administration frequently makes, relies on, and bases policy on fictitious and outlandish claims. Last year, the administration claimed the\u00a0Venezuelan gang\u00a0Tren de Aragua<\/a>\u00a0had, for example,\u00a0invaded<\/a>\u00a0the United States, which it cited as justification to use the\u00a01798 Alien Enemies Act\u00a0to fast-track deportation <\/a>of people the government says belong to the gang. The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals eventually blocked the government from using the wartime law. \u201cWe conclude that the findings do not support that an invasion or a predatory incursion has occurred,\u201d\u00a0wrote<\/a>\u00a0Judge Leslie Southwick.<\/p>\n Last September, Trump even claimed that U.S. troops engaged in\u00a0combat with members\u00a0<\/a>of Tren de Aragua on the streets of Washington, D.C. \u2014 a fiction that the White House press office refuses to address.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n