A US military operation to seize control of Greenland, the autonomous Danish territory in the Arctic, would effectively mark the end of NATO, Lithuania’s European commissioner Andrius Kubilius said Tuesday.
“I agree with the Danish prime minister: if such a thing were to happen – although I do not believe it will – if the US administration decided to use force to take control of Greenland, that would clearly mean the end of transatlantic relations and NATO,” Kubilius told LRT TV.
“The US administration probably understands this well,” he added.
Kubilius’ remarks followed comments by US President Donald Trump, who reiterated over the weekend his desire to annex Greenland. Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen warned that any US attack on a NATO ally would mean the end of “everything”, including the alliance.
Kubilius said that if Washington seeks to strengthen security in Greenland or the broader Arctic region, it can do so by expanding its existing military presence there.
“Those possibilities already exist. There is absolutely no need to threaten or intimidate with talk of taking over Greenland or its control,” said Kubilius, the European Commission member responsible for defence and space.
He warned that the use of force against Greenland would create an unprecedented paradox for NATO.
“If the United States were to use military force against Greenland, what would it do as a NATO member? NATO would have to defend one of its members – Denmark and its territories – against aggression,” Kubilius said.
Kubilius said he doubted the United States would take concrete action against Greenland, suggesting the rhetoric was unlikely to translate into policy.
“There may be noise, some threats and talk of special solutions – that is possible,” he said.
Trump said Sunday that Greenland, which is rich in minerals critical to the technology industry, should become part of the United States for national security reasons.
Fears of a possible US action were heightened by last Saturday’s operation in Venezuela where US forces attacked targets in the capital Caracas and captured the country’s president Nicolas Maduro.
Asked about the EU’s tepid response and failure to condemn US aggression, Kubilius said the legality of the action was debatable but it showed Washington’s “resolution”.
“We could discuss the actions in Venezuela for a long time in terms of international law, whether it was done legally or not. First, it should be noted that the Americans treat this as a legal operation, not a military one. Often, dictators try to hide behind the formula of international law sovereignty and commit all crimes in their countries with complete impunity and without any control.
“The United States has taken such actions not for the first time in its history, especially in the Western hemisphere. This case should probably be treated separately. It showed that the Trump administration has enough determination and military capabilities for such operations. As for what the consequences may be, this is certainly a matter of speculation, not something we can predict accurately,” Kubilius ruminated.
Newsletter
Every Friday morning.
