Donald Trump\u2019s rationale for decapitating Venezuela\u2019s government is fuelling concerns among European officials that they could soon face an existential dilemma over Greenland.<\/p>\n
The US president over the weekend explained his decision to detain Venezuela\u2019s leader and have the US run the country as a modern revival of the 19th-century Monroe Doctrine \u2014 the \u201cDonroe Doctrine,\u201d as he dubbed it. The principle essentially claims a US right to lead the entire Western Hemisphere, and to control any critical assets within it.<\/p>\n
To Trump, that includes Greenland.<\/p>\n
He made the connection explicit following the military strike in Venezuela, saying he \u201cabsolutely\u201d needs to control the semi-autonomous territory within the Danish kingdom for security purposes. The logic is not just Trump bluster \u2014 the White House recently laid it out in a national security strategy. And Trump has now used the policy to justify his audacious intervention in Venezuela, showing just how far he will go.<\/p>\n
For Europe and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, that carries titanic ramifications. Trump moving on Greenland would pit the US against other members of the transatlantic military alliance it leads and helped found, tarnishing NATO\u2019s credibility and heaping an unprecedented burden on the European Union to enter the military realm.<\/p>\n
\u201cIf 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,\u201d Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen said Monday night on Danish broadcaster TV2.<\/p>\n
Greenland, of course, is not Venezuela, as numerous European officials were quick to argue on Monday. The island falls under NATO\u2019s collective defense guarantee, which asserts that an attack on one alliance member is an attack on all. That should, in theory, provide a considerable deterrent against any traditional military assault.<\/p>\n
ADVERTISEMENT<\/p>\n
CONTINUE READING BELOW<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
Still, Trump\u2019s recent actions have cast his Greenland fixation in a new light.<\/p>\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.moneyweb.co.za\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/447083311-555x370.jpg\")
<\/p>\nDonald Trump aboard Air Force One.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n
\u201cThere was reason for concern even before Venezuela, when it came to Trump\u2019s interest in Greenland,\u201d said Rasmus Sondergaard, a US foreign policy expert at the Danish Institute for International Studies. \u201cThe situation has intensified as Donald Trump now has acted on this doctrine, sending a signal that he is willing to go a long way to pursue his interests.\u201d<\/p>\n
The Danish government is genuinely worried, according to people familiar with the matter, taking Trump\u2019s threats seriously and not assuming they are mere rhetoric or a negotiating tactic. Recent public statements from Copenhagen reflect that concern, with the government mostly reluctant to say anything publicly to avoid fueling tensions.<\/p>\n
\u201cI believe he means it seriously, and that is of course unacceptable,\u201d Frederiksen said Monday. \u201cIt is unacceptable pressure being placed on Greenland. Greenland has stated very clearly that it wants to define its own future. That future must not be defined by others.\u201d<\/p>\n
While Greenland is a self-ruling territory, with the local government controlling most domestic issues, Denmark oversees the Arctic island\u2019s defense and security. The region has become increasingly important as climate change opens up new trade routes and exposes fresh natural resources.<\/p>\n
In response, Russia and China have both moved additional resources into the area, vying for control with the US and its NATO allies.<\/p>\n
ADVERTISEMENT:<\/p>\n
CONTINUE READING BELOW<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.moneyweb.co.za\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/447062404-555x657.jpg\")
<\/p>\n
A US intervention in Greenland would have far-reaching consequences for that balance of power, potentially destabilizing the entire western alliance in the process.<\/p>\n
For NATO, the prospect raises uncomfortable questions about whether its strongest member still sees alliance commitments as binding \u2014 or optional. It also underscores a structural weakness within the alliance: NATO\u2019s Article 5 mutual defense clause doesn\u2019t explicitly address what happens if one member attacks another.<\/p>\n
\u201cThe use of force would be hugely threatening to the alliance, and it would come in addition to existing concerns over US commitment to the alliance,\u201d said Ian Lesser, a German Marshall Fund distinguished fellow specializing in US and transatlantic security policy. \u201cIn the very unlikely case of the Greenland issue unfolding militarily, it would put NATO and the transatlantic relationship into real jeopardy and would be a real gift to Russia and China.\u201d<\/p>\n
Such an event would similarly test the EU\u2019s strength and unity. If NATO fractured from within, Denmark would be forced to turn to its EU partners, effectively asking them to weigh the defense of Greenland against preserving their relationship with Washington.<\/p>\n
The EU\u2019s members lack the military heft to confront the US directly, and have been Washington\u2019s close allies for nearly 80 years. They\u2019re also facing other existential security concerns, including Russia\u2019s war in Ukraine on Europe\u2019s eastern flank.<\/p>\n
ADVERTISEMENT:<\/p>\n
CONTINUE READING BELOW<\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<\/div>\n
Any use of force would additionally represent an unprecedented test of the EU\u2019s Article 42, which obliges members to provide aid and assistance to countries facing attacks from outside the bloc.<\/p>\n
\u201cI\u2019m concerned that in many European capitals, other interests would outweigh the anger over a potential US attack. There is still a need for the Americans, for example, when it comes to the Russian threat,\u201d Sondergaard said. \u201cThat in itself could be an objective for Trump \u2014 to divide Europe by doing this.\u201d<\/p>\n
For now, EU leaders are simply reiterating their solidarity with Denmark and Greenland, emphasizing that the island falls under NATO\u2019s security umbrella in the event of aggression. The European Commission, the EU\u2019s executive branch, downplayed comparisons between Trump\u2019s designs on Venezuela and Greenland.<\/p>\n
\u201cGreenland is an ally to the US and is also covered by the NATO alliance and that is a big big difference,\u201d Paula Pinho, the commission\u2019s chief spokesperson, said during a news conference on Monday. \u201cWe therefore completely stand by Greenland and in no ways do we see a possible comparison with what happened.\u201d<\/p>\n
But that\u2019s no assurance that Trump won\u2019t eventually try to coerce Greenland and Denmark into submission.<\/p>\n
\u201cI am not a nervous person, nor am I naive,\u201d Frederiksen said. \u201cSo I am keeping an eye on all movements on the map right now.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u00a9 2026 Bloomberg<\/p>\n
Follow Moneyweb\u2019s in-depth finance and business news on WhatsApp here.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n