By Sydni Brown
27/01/2026
The recent threats by President Donald Trump to use military force in his endeavor to acquire Greenland have paved the way for one specific yet controversial solution to gain traction. Since Greenland is currently a part of the Kingdom of Denmark, Copenhagen could exercise its right to enact the mutual defense clause of Article 42.7 of the EU Treaty if the American military threat persists. While EU law gives Denmark a certain ground for action, and Brussels has reacted rapidly and sharply to Trump's messages, the European structure does not (yet) focus on military cooperation among its members, this task being traditionally left to NATO. The reasoning behind the potential desertion of NATO's Article 51 common defense provision is due to the United States' influence over the transatlantic defense organization and the very fact that this episode marks a potential 'attack among allies'.
Denmark and Greenland:
One of the most notable instances of Greenland's dissatisfaction with Denmark's rule began with the forced joining of the European Economic Community. The purpose of the EEC was to foster economic growth and stability between member states. Denmark officially joined the EEC in 1973, bringing along with it Greenland. Under the conditions, the EEC member states were permitted to utilize Greenland's waters for commercial fishing. Over 90% of Greenland's exports came from fishing, resulting in lower profit margins for Greenland locals. In 1985, Greenland voted to formally exit the EEC, thus 'regaining control' of their waters. The EEC was the foundation behind the European Union and may be one of the main reasons why Greenlanders have been so hesitant about the idea of (re)joining the EU, however the current circumstances might mark a turning point both in relation to their feelings towards Denmark and the EU.
Article 42.7 of the EU vs. Article 51 of NATO:
The kidnapping of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro Moros on January 3, 2026, has put the EU on edge in terms of how far the US is willing to go to reach its goal of securing American hegemony in the western hemisphere. This puts Denmark in a precarious position, as relying on the European Union to support Greenland while Greenland is not part of the EU is quite risky. NATO has not been overly forthcoming with intervention with the United States, as the implications of a possible war weigh heavily on most member states. Therefore, invoking Article 51 of NATO may prove unsuccessful and lead Greenland closer to annexation by the US. Article 42.7 of TEU could provide a much stronger ground than Article 51, with the former stating "Member States have an obligation to provide aid and assistance by all the means in their power," and the latter only justifies aid "as it deems necessary."
The Shortfalls:
Although Article 42.7 of TEU may seem like the obvious choice, it does come with its downfalls. The treaty requires unanimous acceptance of all member states before it can be enacted. This clause is easier said than done. With Hungary being at the forefront of this uncertainty. The Trump administration and Hungary's Prime Minister Viktor Orban have formed close ties in the past few months. For example, the US allowed Hungary to continue buying Russian gas through the Turkstream pipeline and pay for it in hard currency using a Bulgarian loophole. Most recently, since the launch of Trump's Board of Peace at the World Economic Forum in Davos, the very first EU leader to publicly accept the invitation to join was unsurprisingly Orban. This rather strong relationship and the EU's vetoing system might be the linchpin of Article 42.7 of TEU. If not all member states are in agreement, then enacting the treaty is a futile affair. Which makes Article 51 of the NATO charter the only other viable option for Denmark. Although multiple member states have voiced their support for Greenland at the end of the day it is up to NATO to decide if they want to enact Article 51 and provide support, as well as EU member states, who have little desire to get into an all-out war with the United States.
The Future of NATO:
If intervention by the United States against Denmark did occur, it would mark the first direct military aggression against a member of the EU since it was founded. This would also mark the first annexation of one NATO member by another NATO ally. Any kind of military intervention in Greenland would most likely prove to be the end of NATO's alliance with the United States. Not to mention how poor two-member states fighting over sovereign territory would look on the world stage. NATO, of course, does not want to be dragged into the middle of this conflict, but as the US seems to further push its advances, the threat of invasion seems inevitable. This has the potential to completely reevaluate NATO’s reach of power, influence on the world stage, and interests in becoming a buffer between two member states.
Greenland and the EU Together Again?
The likelihood of Article 42.7 being enacted by Denmark is exceptionally low. There is not enough justification in the matter, whether that be for technical issues, such as Greenland not being a part of the EU, as well as a boots on the ground issue (military shortage), leaving Denmark in a state of limbo. Theoretically, Greenland could (re)join the EU; however, that requires time, cooperation, and acceptance - none of which Greenland currently has. Although there is a very small push from the people of Greenland to join the European Union. Recent US threats of annexation have pushed Greenland closer to the EU, perhaps not yet to the point of return, but very close. Greenland must rely on EU member states for support - so far, France, Germany, Italy, Poland, Spain (and the United Kingdom) have issued a joint statement on January 6, 2026, expressing their support for Denmark. The European Parliament has also stated that any attempt to undermine the sovereignty of Denmark and Greenland violates international law and the United Nations Charter. Although condemning President Trump’s statements on the annexation of Greenland and publicly voicing support is helpful, the obligations of member states stated in Article 42.7 are essential to Greenland’s sovereignty.
The (Concept Framework of a) Deal...
Last week, President Trump announced at the World Economic Forum Annual Meeting in Davos that he would not use military force to secure Greenland. The President also stated he would no longer impose new tariffs on France, Germany, Sweden, Norway, Finland, the Netherlands, and the U.K. after they sent military aid to Greenland. Secretary General of NATO Mark Rutte met with President Trump in hopes of addressing the Greenland debate. The result of their discussions was the agreed "Framework Deal." Neither Denmark nor Greenland was included in the meeting processions. Mark Rutte claimed he had not discussed the key issues of Danish sovereignty over Greenland during his meeting with President Trump. However, anonymous officials have claimed that the details of the deal proposed that Denmark cede sovereignty over small areas of Greenland, allowing the United States to build military bases for security purposes. President Trump has previously stated that Greenland is essential for his plan on building a "Golden Dome Defense System" aimed at defending the US against potential Chinese and Russian missile attacks. Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen expressed that Denmark was willing to negotiate on everything, but "we cannot negotiate on our sovereignty." Negotiations concerning the future of two sovereign nations conducted without either party present raises a fundamental question pertaining to international law: Can the United States legally compel Denmark to surrender territory in the name of American security?
Sources:
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c86vvjxe9z7o
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/ckg4r193152o
https://www.eppgroup.eu/newsroom/the-european-parliament-supports-greenland-and-denmark
https://www.politico.eu/article/5-things-to-know-about-the-eu-common-defense-clause/
https://newunionpost.eu/2026/01/12/trump-threats-greenland-eu-rejoin/
Do you like this page?