At his January 8, 2026 press conference, President Trump mentioned the possibility of having to choose between Greenland and the other major world powers; this created widespread concern throughout Europe and raised the question of how the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), the main source of European and North American security since 1949, can maintain its security commitments to both the Atlantic Ocean side and to both Europe and North America in the coming years.
The Trump Administration’s growing interest in the Arctic region
Trump told Euronews that:
“We may have to make a decision, we may have to decide whether it is NATO or Greenland.”
He continued:
“Greenland is an area of high interest to us because of its geography, natural resources and military capabilities”
— as part of the Trump Administration’s growing interest in the Arctic region.
According to CNN, U.S., Brussels, and other European capitals’ officials expressed their unease with Trump’s statement by saying that if there is any indication that Washington would prefer to choose Greenland over Europe, it would undermine the credibility of the alliance.
Stoltenberg, Secretary General of NATO, told the media that “The Alliance remains ‘the bedrock of transatlantic security’ — and emphasized that “there should be no rhetoric that undermines the unity of the Alliance.” The diplomats of Europe also echoed Stoltenberg, pointing out that NATO is based on the principle of collective defense and therefore if Washington reduces its commitment to Europe, then its adversaries will see the perceived weakness and have the opportunity to exploit it.
For the United States, Greenland serves as a strategically advantageous vantage point
For the United States, Greenland serves as a strategically advantageous vantage point for monitoring the activities of other nations in the Arctic and providing military capabilities. The United States currently operates Thule Air Base, which serves as one of the primary installations for missile defense and surveillance. Trump’s emphasis on Greenland represents a shift in U.S. foreign policy toward focusing on security in the Arctic. Some critics believe that this should not occur at the expense of the U.S.’s commitment to NATO’s European members.
Trump’s comments also coincide with existing challenges facing NATO. Divisions within the alliance exist regarding issues related to defense spending, burden-sharing, and strategic priorities. The U.S. has historically urged European member states to increase their military spending; however, Trump’s framing of Greenland as an alternative to European priorities adds another layer of tension.
European officials are concerned that such rhetoric would create distrust
European officials are concerned that such rhetoric would create distrust and potentially weaken the deterrent effect of NATO against Russia, especially given Russia’s continued assertion of itself in Eastern Europe and the Arctic. Experts warn that if European allies perceive a decline in Washington’s commitment to NATO, then NATO’s credibility could be undermined.
The Trump administration believes that the economic importance of Greenland should not be undervalued; however, they also believe that because the Arctic is quickly becoming more competitive, investing in the region is vital to U.S. long-term security. Opponents of the Trump administration’s viewpoint see an opportunity cost in framing Greenland as a choice against NATO; instead, they argue that the United States could strengthen its commitments to both Arctic security and European security.
The collective defense principle found in Article 5 of the NATO Charter remains a “non-negotiable” obligation of the alliance
President Trump’s comments regarding Greenland serve to highlight some of the fundamental challenges facing NATO as it attempts to modernize itself to meet the changing nature of the global political environment. As the Arctic becomes increasingly strategically important, the alliance finds itself challenged to establish new priorities in the area while simultaneously continuing its commitment to the security of Europe.
President Trump’s comments on Greenland have also reignited discussion about the U.S.’s position within the NATO alliance and the future of transatlantic relations. During the upcoming NATO meeting, European leaders are expected to ask Washington for clarification on whether Greenland will serve as an adjunct effort to the NATO alliance or if Greenland will compete with NATO for the attention and resources of the United States.
Additionally, the rhetoric of President Trump adds another layer of strain on NATO and creates uncertainty about the priorities of the United States and what implications those priorities may have for how the U.S. weighs the importance of Greenland against the importance of NATO. Although the strategic importance of Greenland is clear, the concept of a “trade-off” has been cause for concern amongst the NATO allies and threatens to upset the delicate balance between the U.S. desire to project power in the Arctic and the U.S. obligation to provide for the security of Europe.
