End of Soft Policy; Europe Stands Up to Trump

Something has changed in Europe. Donald Trump reiterated his position on Monday, stating that the U.S. needs Greenland for national security reasons. When asked by reporters if he was prepared to use force to seize it, the U.S. President replied, "I have no opinion," once again sending shivers down the spines of worried Greenlanders. He stated today in Davos that he wants "immediate negotiations" to acquire Greenland but insists that "he will not use force." Greenland is a semi-autonomous territory belonging to Denmark, a country that is a member of the European Union and NATO. Donald Trump is now putting heavy pressure on Denmark's allies in both organizations to abandon Copenhagen and allow the U.S. to take control of Greenland, or else face punitive tariffs on all their exports to the United States. This is a terrifying scenario for European economies that are already in recession, especially those reliant on exports to the U.S., such as Germany's automotive industry and Italy's luxury goods market. The German finance minister stated on Monday after an emergency meeting with his French counterpart, "We will not allow ourselves to be blackmailed." Trump's threats have hit European governments like a slap in the face; governments that had only reached agreements on trade tariffs with the U.S. President last year (separately regarding the EU and the UK). French Finance Minister Roland Lescure said, "We are crossing into uncharted territory. We have never seen anything like this. An ally, a friend for 250 years, is considering using tariffs... as a geopolitical weapon." His German counterpart Lars Klingbeil added, "A line has been crossed... You understand that I am not saying exactly what will happen today. But one thing must be clear: Europe must be ready." Suddenly, it seems that the expiration date of the soft and cautious approach towards Mr. Trump, which European leaders had openly adopted since his return for a second term in the White House, has passed. Europe and the good cop, bad cop approach. It is still too early to read the final sermon of transatlantic relations, but at least the European Union hopes to enter discussions with the U.S. President at the World Economic Forum in Switzerland, as one former U.S. President put it, "with a soft voice and a big stick in hand." Theodore (Teddy) Roosevelt believed that to achieve goals, diplomacy backed by credible power is needed, and it seems Europe is now adopting the good cop, bad cop approach. European leaders tell Mr. Trump that they will support his prioritization of Arctic security, so there is no need for him to act alone regarding Greenland. At the same time, EU diplomats have revealed that they are considering imposing tariffs worth €93 billion on American goods or even restricting access for American businesses, likely including banks and advanced technology companies, to the vast single market of this bloc if he proceeds with what has become known as the "Greenland tariffs." These retaliatory measures are likely to have chain effects on American consumers as well. EU investors have a significant presence in almost all 50 states of the U.S. and are said to be a source of employment for 3.4 million Americans. The EU has a weak voice in international diplomacy. This bloc consists of 27 countries that often disagree with each other, but it has immense influence in the global economy and trade, where decisions are mainly made by the European Commission representing the members of the EU's single market. The EU is the world's largest trader of goods and services and is expected to account for nearly 16% of global trade by 2024. Therefore, Brussels hopes that if Mr. Trump realizes that he may gain an island (Greenland) but likely lose his close allies (Europe) and be blamed for increasing costs for American consumers (due to EU retaliatory tariffs), he will retreat from his maximalist position and enter negotiations for a peaceful solution. EU Commission Deputy Spokesperson Olav Gyll said on Monday, "Our priority is engagement, not escalation." Nicolas Poitier, an economist and international trade expert at the Bruegel think tank based in Brussels, says, "Trump is forcing Europeans to finally stand on their own feet." He added, "[While] the damage from [Trump's] tariffs for Europe is quite manageable... the much bigger question here is not economic, but security and foreign policy. The EU cannot afford to remain unresponsive." However, on Monday, U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bassett was not particularly impressed. Speaking in Davos, he painted a picture of a President with a more resolute decision: "The President views Greenland as a strategic asset for the United States. We will not outsource our security to anyone else." He warned that Europe's retaliatory tariff action would be "irrational," and this is where Europe feels stuck: if it acts, it is condemned; if it does not act, it is also condemned. Some in Europe are concerned that if they confront Donald Trump now, they may push the U.S. further away. The bitter truth is: Europe needs Washington to secure a lasting peace agreement for Ukraine and for the security of its continent. Despite commitments to increase defense spending, Europe remains heavily reliant on the U.S. British Prime Minister Keir Starmer reiterated his support for Denmark and Greenland's sovereignty on Monday, emphasizing that it is in the "national interest" of Britain to "continue to cooperate with the Americans in defense, security, and intelligence." The British Prime Minister stated, "Our nuclear deterrent is our most important weapon. A deterrent to ensure the security of all the people of Britain, which is my primary duty, and this requires having a good relationship with the United States." However, if Europe continues to try to "manage" Mr. Trump instead of standing firm, especially as he threatens the sovereignty of one of its NATO allies (Denmark) and brandishes the sword of economic sanctions against other allies supporting Copenhagen, then the continent will face the risk of showing serious weakness in front of public opinion and the international stage. Kaya Kalas, a senior EU diplomat, wrote on X on Monday, "We are not interested in a fight, but we will stand firm on our position." She, a former Prime Minister of Estonia, a country that fears the expansionist shadow of Russia, is eager to show Moscow that Europe can and will show its teeth to the U.S. if pressured. Tara Varma stated, "Europeans can no longer back down." She is a security and geopolitics expert at the German Marshall Fund think tank. She said, "Over the past year, they have only resorted to personal diplomacy [with Donald Trump] to try to commit him to collective defense in Europe and guarantee security for Ukraine after a ceasefire with Russia." But if he can suddenly change course (as he has done now), intertwining economic and security issues, and if he does not get his way, threatens NATO, then, according to her, how much can Europe ultimately trust U.S. security guarantees under this administration? Observers of these developments are watching not only from the sidelines of Russia but also China. From their perspective, the West, traditionally tied to the U.S. and Europe at its core and dominating global politics for decades, is now unraveling. The world is increasingly dominated by a number of great powers, including Russia and China, but also India, Saudi Arabia, and to some extent Brazil. China hopes that Donald Trump's apparent instability towards his allies will make Beijing appear a more stable and reliable partner and draw more international trade towards itself. Canada, a country that Mr. Trump threatened to make the 51st state of the U.S., has recently reached a limited trade agreement with Beijing. This country is trying to reduce its dependence on Washington. The U.S. President has also shown little respect for multilateral institutions like NATO and the United Nations, which were established by Western powers after World War II to manage the global order. Some refer to the "Peace Council" that Mr. Trump is now launching and is reported to want to hold a ceremony for it this Thursday in Davos. Many world leaders and prominent business figures are attending this conference. This council is apparently designed to oversee the reconstruction of Gaza after the devastating two-year Israeli invasion aimed at destroying Hamas following the group's attack on Israel on October 7, 2023. However, the council's charter calls for a "more agile and effective institution for international peacebuilding"; a phrase indicating that its scope of authority could be much broader and even compete with the United Nations. The French President has such an interpretation. A source close to Emmanuel Macron issued a statement on Monday saying that France does not intend to accept an invitation it received "along with many countries" to join the Peace Council. The statement read: "The charter [of the council]... raises fundamental questions, particularly regarding respect for the principles and structure of the United Nations, which should never be called into question." The Kremlin announced on Monday that Vladimir Putin has also been invited to join the council. This issue indicates that Trump, despite Moscow's four-year invasion of Ukraine and its refusal to accept a U.S.-backed peace plan so far, is still eager to maintain contact with the Russian President. There are also questions about Mr. Trump's overall role in this council and his request for world leaders to pay one billion dollars for permanent membership. However, Tara Varma insists that the Peace Council is not about peace. She says, "How can it be, when you invite leaders like Putin to be part of it?" She adds, "Trump wants to be seen as a peacemaker. He wants the headlines, but without doing the hard and time-consuming work necessary to secure peace. His strategy is more hit and run. He cannot replace multilateral institutions like the United Nations that have been around for 80 years." Nevertheless, perhaps Mr. Trump, by ignoring the international norms of the past several decades, is shaking some of these multilateral institutions and forcing or even compelling them to modernize and become more relevant. Membership in the UN Security Council may need to be less Western-centric and represent changes in global power structures. NATO's European members have acknowledged that they need to spend more to defend themselves. Mr. Trump is not the first U.S. President to say this, although he is much more explicit. After he threatened that the U.S. would no longer defend countries that do not pay their share, all NATO members except Spain agreed to significantly increase their security spending. Returning to Greenland, polls show that 55% of Americans do not want to buy the island, and 86% oppose its military seizure by the U.S. Denmark and other European powers are lobbying lawmakers in Congress to convince them that the sovereignty of Greenland and Denmark must be protected. Transatlantic relations, although damaged, have not yet collapsed. Donald Trump still keeps in touch with his friends: with Giorgia Meloni, the Prime Minister of Italy, with Keir Starmer; and with Mark Rutte, the NATO Secretary-General. Lines of communication remain open. However, ultimately, if Europeans want to try to get their message across to Donald Trump, they must stand together. Not just the scattered EU member countries, not just NATO, all countries together, with Britain, with its closer relationship with the U.S., will play a key role in this. However, European leaders are caught between doing what they believe is right in the international arena and their domestic concerns. If an all-out trade war breaks out across the Atlantic, it will hurt their voters. Achieving consensus over Greenland for any length of time will be challenging.