Would NATO fight a U.S. invasion of Greenland?
A fishing boat navigates around icebergs that have broken off from the Jakobshavn Glacier and are floating in Disko Bay in Ilulissat, Greenland, on March 10, 2025.
Joe Raedle | Getty Images News | Getty Images
Europe has spent much of 2025 scrambling to strengthen its defenses against Russia; But just a week into the new year, he is being forced to rethink security once again in the face of President Donald Trump’s threats to annex Greenland.
Trump is increasing his calls for Greenland, a semi-autonomous Danish region, to be brought under Washington’s control. This week, the White House said Trump was considering various options to achieve this, including military action.
Greenland, the world’s largest island, is rich in undiscovered mineral resources. Although it is geographically located on the North American continent, it is politically part of Europe.
Capturing the island would be no mean feat. In addition to political obstacles at home and abroad, any attempt to seize the region by force would pit the United States against its NATO allies.
Will NATO fight the USA over Greenland?
Trump’s top aide Stephen Miller said in an interview with CNN earlier this week. recommended no European country would be prepared to fight to protect Greenland. Although he did not explicitly rule out the possibility of US military intervention in Greenland, he said “there is no need to even think or talk about it in the context of a military operation.” [because] “No one is going to fight the United States militarily over the future of Greenland,” he said, pointing to the island’s small population.
Denmark and Greenland, on the other hand, take the US military action seriously. Denmark will spend 88 billion Danish kroner ($13.8 billion) to rearm Greenland, given “the serious security situation we are in,” Danish Defense Minister and Deputy Prime Minister Troels Lund Poulsen said on Tuesday evening.
Despite Denmark’s apparent willingness to defend Greenland, analysts told CNBC they do not believe European powers will open fire on American troops.
Edward R. Arnold, a senior research fellow at the Royal United Services Institute, a British defense think tank, told CNBC in a phone interview on Tuesday that the White House has the military strength to move into Greenland and could do so “really pretty quickly” if it wanted to.
But according to Arnold, Washington will not have to launch an operation like the one seen in Venezuela over the weekend because “it will not be opposed in any way.”
“Which European military commander would lead a force on a US military transport arriving in Greenland?” he said. “This would potentially start an inter-NATO war. And the United States knows it.”
The United States has by far the largest military force of any NATO member. NATO estimated that the United States would have 1.3 million military personnel in 2024, compared to the rest of the alliance’s total of 2.1 million personnel. The next largest number of military personnel belonged to Türkiye, whose forces employed an estimated 481,000 people.
Arnold said he expects the United States to gradually increase the number of troops it deploys in Greenland rather than ordering a full-scale military operation or invasion.
“They don’t shoot at them,” he said of NATO forces. “So you have the strange situation of the United States placing these troops in Greenland and the Europeans not being able to do much about it.” [it]but protest politically.”
A protester holds a sign reading ‘We are not for sale’ in front of the US consulate during a demonstration with the slogan ‘Greenland belongs to the Greenlandic people’ in Nuuk, Greenland, on March 15, 2025.
Christian Klindt Soelbeck | Afp | Getty Images
Georgios Samaras, an assistant professor of public policy at King’s College London, agrees that Greenland and the wider NATO alliance will have limited options to stop a US push to gain further control of the island.
“I don’t see what NATO can do to stop the United States, because for starters we’re talking about a superpower that has multiple military bases across the continent that could theoretically be used to invade a NATO member from its own ranks,” he told CNBC in a phone interview.
Not only will NATO have to deal with being hostile to one of its own members, but it will also have to consider the broader security implications of seceding from the United States, according to Jamie Shea, associate fellow of Chatham House’s International Security Program and a former member of NATO’s international team.
“I will not see a military reaction” [from NATO] “Because the United States will be able to quickly deal with the limited forces the Europeans can send, and European governments are unlikely to consider doing so,” he said. “They need all their forces to defend Europe and contribute to a European reassurance force for Ukraine.”
The end of NATO?
On Monday, Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen warned that an American takeover of Greenland would mean the end of NATO. 23 of NATO’s 32 members (including Denmark) are also members of the European Union, which is working hard to ensure the Trump administration maintains its resolve. Support for Ukraine.
“They will want to avoid a direct conflict with the United States, which would mean the end of NATO and US support for Ukraine,” Shea said. he said.
King’s College’s Samaras agreed that any escalation towards Greenland would destroy NATO.
“A NATO member threatening another member of the alliance doesn’t just lead to fighting. It makes the alliance’s promise of mutual defense appear conditional and political,” he said. “This would mean the end of NATO. I don’t think NATO can continue.”
Shea told CNBC that while European military resistance is unlikely, NATO has ways to put pressure on Washington through the European Union.
“If the EU adopts sanctions, such as tariffs or restrictions on access, against US companies and investments, it will be in the economic arena where Europe can put pressure on the US,” Shea said.
“European governments could also reject US use of European military bases or facilities such as early warning radars. But these would obviously be difficult decisions for European governments to make, especially at a time when they are working hard to engage Washington on the Ukraine peace plan and security guarantees.”
Trump: USA will always be with NATO
Despite his ambition to seize Greenland and driving a wedge between the United States and its NATO allies, Trump insisted on Wednesday that America stands with the alliance even as he attacks the organization.
“Remember, all the big NATO fans were at 2% of GDP and most of them weren’t paying their bills until I came along,” he said on Truth Social. to mailIt refers to the defense spending targets of member states. Trump later suggested that the alliance could not fend off modern security threats without the United States on its side.
“THERE IS ZERO FEAR OF NATO WITHOUT RUSSIA AND CHINA, THE USA, AND I DOUBT THAT NATO WOULD BE THERE FOR US IF WE REALLY NEED IT,” he said. “Even if they are not on our side, we will always be on NATO’s side.”
