At Davos, Donald Trump attempted to calm international fears about military action against Greenland while making explicit that his administration will use economic leverage to achieve territorial objectives. The US president’s speech reflected his transactional approach to foreign relations, offering assurances about avoiding armed conquest while threatening economic consequences for countries that don’t accommodate American demands for the Arctic territory.
Trump’s national security rationale positioned Greenland as essential for defending against potential adversaries in an era of renewed great power competition. He argued that the island’s geographic location between major powers makes it critically important and that current arrangements under Danish sovereignty are inadequate for American security needs. The president’s vision includes a missile defense system requiring ownership rather than cooperative agreements, which he dismissed as insufficient for defending leased territory.
Nordic officials expressed measured relief at Trump’s no-force pledge while emphasizing that fundamental disagreements over Greenland persist. Denmark’s foreign minister noted that ruling out invasion is positive but doesn’t eliminate underlying challenges, while Norwegian officials acknowledged addressing widespread fears about potential armed conflict. These reactions demonstrated European awareness that Trump’s Greenland campaign continues despite his commitment to peaceful methods.
In a move apparently designed to claim diplomatic success while avoiding immediate confrontation, Trump announced postponing tariffs against eight European countries. He attributed this decision to productive negotiations with NATO leadership that supposedly established a framework for Arctic security, though details remained scarce and Rutte declined to comment. The opacity of these alleged agreements raised questions about whether substantive progress occurred or whether Trump simply needed a face-saving exit from his tariff threats.
Trump’s broader message criticized European allies on multiple fronts beyond Greenland, from energy policy to immigration to defense spending. He promoted American economic achievements, attacked renewable energy as fraudulent, defended fossil fuels, questioned mutual defense commitments, and praised authoritarian leaders while insulting democratic counterparts. The 80-minute speech drew criticism from American officials including Republicans troubled by Trump’s disregard for indigenous Greenlanders and Democrats who called it one of the most insignificant hours they’d experienced.