NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte has hosted Denmark’s Defence Minister and Greenland’s Foreign Minister at NATO Headquarters for talks focused on security in the High North, according to the alliance.
The meeting addressed the growing strategic importance of the Arctic, including Greenland, within NATO’s collective defence posture. NATO said discussions centred on the region’s role in wider Alliance security and the need to maintain stability amid changing geopolitical and environmental conditions.
According to NATO, the Alliance has been increasing its ability to deter and defend in the High North, supported by a persistent presence intended to safeguard shared interests and support peace and stability across the region.
The alliance noted that member states have been investing in key military capabilities relevant to Arctic operations. Denmark was cited as an example, with recent and ongoing investments including additional air-to-air refuelling capacity, long-range uncrewed systems, maritime patrol aircraft and F-35 fighter jets.
NATO said Allies will continue working together to ensure the Alliance maintains the capabilities required to address security challenges across all regions, including the Arctic and High North.
One of the least reported and most scary facts of the last 48 hours is the US has activated 1500 soldiers in the 11th airborne. The reason given is they are on stand by to go to Minnesota however it doesn’t seem to make much sense to send soldiers from Alaska for such a duty. The 11th airborne is Americas only trained Arctic unit.
I’d heard of the soldiers placed on standby but didn’t realise their specialism. So much to learn about the world of defence.
I was scared from the moment Trump started attacking Venezuela, though, as his messages to the world made it sound like he was plundering them for oil
First thing I did was wonder if this would extend to Greenland, given they also have resources Trump might want to grab.
The temperature in Minnesota is -18 degrees, the soldiers from Alaska would be the most appropriate conditioned to be deployed there, in that low temperature environment.
I’m not sure what staggers me more that a US president has put the 11th airborne on standby to invade a fellow NATO country or essentially subdue one of its own states…
Especially given that the only violence in that state was ICE shooting an unarmed woman in the face.
It’s a very very strange world.
She was armed with a vehicle that she drove at the officer, after she was told to stop and get out of the car. Other videos have surfaced with her following ICE around and disrupting what their job, she was not innocent, she was a crazy activist, I guess f. around and find out, stupidity at best!
hello, brand new person ! 🙄🤦♂️
Oh look a Yankee bot, no son, you have your own Gestapo shooting unarmed civilians. And a lunatic for Potus. How far can you sink? Still got a bit to go to rival Putin or Xi but y’all are on your way.
Ah a fascist boot licker.
She was in a car with a licensce plate. Standard SOPs for police and armed forces world wide are not to stand in front of a vehicle, and if she makes a run for it to get the plate numbers. Not shoot her in the face you Nazi.
I love your way with words, Dern.
The entire 10th mountain division is a cold weather unit.
Apparently not Chris, it’s the 11th airborne these days that’s Arctic trained. 10th mountain is in NY so not much chance for artic warfare. Don’t worry I am sure you will have plenty of trained soldiers to over power the people of Greenland and claim the imperial glory that comes with subjecting “lesser” people’s to your will.
🇺🇸🫡 MAGA
Also 11th Airborne consists of only two small Brigades, Finland alone has more arctic trained troops.
All of Trump’s messages about making the world safe from threats are falling on deaf ears. To all those outside the USA, including its closest allies, America IS the threat. And if anyone thinks calmer heads will rein him in, look how many people voted for him. Are they really going to rise up against him when he’s apparently making them richer?
Trump is going bonkers, anything seems possible now. He wants Greenland, just for the sake of adding a large land mass to the USA for posterity – the defence excuse is exaggerated. Adding Greenland would mean changing the US flag … adding another star. That would result in Trump redesigning the US flag! Lol!
If they took Greenland they would not make it a state.. they would make it a territory. It’s full of natives Greenlanders a MAGA government would not give them voting seats in congress or the senate or college votes…
Jonathan, the US has a lot of Territories and Dependencies. They really are quite Imperial!
Yep 3.6 million people live in US territories without a vote on the president.. but dare to tell them they are imperialists ….. even though the USA itself is a contiguous land empire made up of conquered nations… but it seems some nations don’t count…..
Type,,,, the old, very old senior knows he will not last much longer. His ego and narcissism demands legacies. So, grabbing Greenland and Canada will make him the greatest ever Prez. He really, really is extremely narcissistic, he demands a Nobel prize only because Obama got one. It is all about ego and vanity, such as the giant gold ballroom, a triumph arch as a momentum to himself, on and on.
Xi is laughing his arse off as the US destroys its hegemony in weeks…
Expect the Chinese government to be offering words of support condolences and trade deals to Europe. If china can make the EU nations as well as Canada true neutrals as well as the works its doing on India and Korea ( it’s not going to bother with Japan, just plan to smash it to jelly if it even looks wrong, Japan knows it’s hated by China ) and the US somehow manages to make an Geostrategic enemy of the EU and Canada it’s utterly and completely geostrategically screwed in the long term.. is in a 1980s soviet level screwed. .. China will have successfully pulled off its dream, the geopolitical isolation of the US.
What Trump is doing is beyond monumentally stupid and the US establishment has such profound hubris in US power that it’s happily letting him do it.. it beggars belief really.
The best thing the EU can do if he does go for Greenland, is let him have it, and completely pull the plug on the US and focus entirely on China and India.. while geostrategically securing it’s primacy over Africa ( morally out the window in the new world ).. make it very clear to China that Europe with 25% of the worlds wealth is friendly and fully open on the proviso Xi controls his poodle Putin..then it builds its geostrategic hard power from the mid Atlantic to the mid Indian Ocean..
Not sure what the hell the UK would do in this new US-EU-India-China world but it would need to figure it quickly.
CANZUK
To be honest I think the best road for Canada in that case would be joining the EU and the EU nations supporting Canada to massively fortify itself against US aggression.. the reality is the UK Canada and Australia don’t have the mass to support each other across those distances.. if it could be made to work and include say Iceland and Norway.. it would offer a powerful group that could in theory hold its own.. but if the world turns into the Wild West ( and it will if the US invades Greenland ) then I don’t think we could generate the pure mass of naval and strategic air needed..
The reality is to stay a peer of a predatory US, Russia and China ( even god forbid potentially a predatory EU, that would not like an independent aircraft carrier and invasion route stuck at its most strategic bit) would as a power group need to be able to generate a good 3 carrier battle groups and 20+ SSNs.. have many hundreds of fighters in Canada, the UK, less in Australia ( due to being the arse end of the world ).. but lots in our other geostrategic hubs.. assention, Falklands, Cyprus, gib and the BIOT.. it would have massive geostrategic spread but keeping it all protected would be Herculean for the UK Canada and Aus….
If NATO falls our only real option is to either rejoin the EU or enter a defence pact with it. Geography and a largely aligned world view make it our best bet. Europe also needs to improve ties with China from a joint position of strength. Only then will it see us as an equal.
unfortunately ( not being a fan of the EU) I do think you are correct that the UK will need to swallow that bucket of sick or be for ever in danger stuck between the US, EU and Russia.. always the weakest link that could be kicked by any of them as an example to the other….
Rob, if the US leaves NATO, which I doubt, there is a good option for NATO to survive with its 31 remaining members (Canada and ENATO). NATO is headquartered in Europe and we need mutual defence here in our continent.
It will not be NATO through Graham but a different treaty.. the NATO treaty as is requires the US to be a member as a Number of the articles specifically Name and require Washington to undertake actions… and I don’t think there is any mechanism in the treaty to change those articles.. so I think it likely from a legal point of view they would need to disbanded the treaty and resign a new one… NATO 2.
Unfortunately one only has to look at the weak assed response of the EU to see it’s no super power in the waiting. Much as I love the idea of Canada and the UK joining I just don’t see a path to it. There is physically no way for Canada or the UK to meet the Maastricht convergence criteria (on debt as no one in the EU meets it) and the EU is unable to change any of its treaties.
The EU is at its heart a bureaucratic organisation based on farming, fishing and customs duties and it’s all it’s likely to ever be. The Northern European countries that do look at the common good are likely to always be overwhelmed by Eastern and southern countries (including France) with a far more mercantile view which is much more inline with Trump style politics.
I think CANZUK can easily have the mass to be a geostrategic player in the world if it chooses to. It has a fairly large population, massive GDP, colossal land mass and global basing and control over much of the world’s mineral wealth.
In a multi polar world it’s a big and important block, not the largest player but certainly top table. If we are looking at a world at the end of the 21st century where China is a regional power with only the worlds 3rd or 4th biggest population and Nigeria and India are the largest country in the world CANZUK may well be in the top 5 given its well above average population growth and general welcomes to immigration compared to other nations.
It will likely only become a reality if the US backs away from the world as its forerunner (Commonwealth and Dominions )was only supplanted by the US emerging on to the world stage in 1941.
Not be long until trump is talking about the Falklands he’s good friends with Argentina the now, as for the other territories we’re really going to struggle a would have thought.
Jonathan, the 0range mobster will Taco. Europe will counter with tariffs of their own and threaten to sell off Treasuries. Canada and China has shown that you can not appease the 0range gangster or he demands more and more. He is not truthful describing Greenland as National Security, it is a vanity grab.
I hope the rest of NATO has a plan to seize and close all US military bases in Europe if Taco is dumb enough to attack Greenland. That will be many USAF airfields and aircraft captured and US POWs
US POW’s? Hopefully they don’t starve as the US aligns with Russia in the east and the USN blockades the continent in the west.
Germany tried this twice, the continent is indefensible.
You living your little wet dream🤣😀 Europe is a net exporter of food so good luck with that one.. it’s the US which is net importer of food.. and it’s navy would be half the size of the PLAN and European navies combined.. I’m betting China would much prefer to team up with Europe than the US… ( they actually don’t hate us.. but they do the US a bit).. and guess who Russia follows.. don’t be such a Pratt troll.. turning against your allies is beyond insanity.
So what else do you suggest? If the US effectively attacks a fellow NATO member and a state of war exists do you think we should let the enemy continue to operate military assets from within the remaining nato territory? Its what less than a 10minute flight from Lakenheath to RAF Marham, Conningsby – do we let the USAF fly strike missions against these and other UK targets?
And Do You Know why the continent was indefensible.. for both Hitler and before that Napoleon.. have you ever looked at a map and studies the napoleonic and world wars ( no Hollywood war films don’t count ). The continental power was isolated and destroyed by the existence of the UK and its empire.. unless the US was somehow deluded into thinking the UK would support it in prosecuting a war against the EU, the U.S. could not isolate Europe… because you would have no allies or bases on this continent and control none of its choke points… and I assure you however much you puff and preen the USN is not what it was and it is not capable of containing the PLAN in the pacific and European navies in the eastern Atlantic and western Indian Ocean.. infact US access to the western Indian Ocean would be massively curtailed because you use Europe as your access point to the western Indian Ocean…
The U.S. losing Europe as an ally is a slow decline and eventual loss of hegemony to china in about a decade.. the U.S. madly declaring war on Europe and attacking Europe will lead to it losing hegemony to china within a year or two… because china will kick the USN out of the western pacific first chance it gets and to fight Europe the USN would need to concentrate its full force into the Atlantic and western Indian Ocean, and whatever you think the European navies are not small and they are as experienced as the USN and know its doctrines and capabilities..it would be a blood bath… I do know what is circulating in MAGA circles about the reduction of Europe… it’s a power and Chinese political warfare feed fantasy.
CANZUK is doomed as a functional power block by simply being too far apart. Countries overwhelmingly do trade with the closest other countries. It’s hard enough for the EU to decide on common interests and goals when they’re all in essentially the same geopolitical position. Canada, Australia, and the UK are in wildly different positions. Realistically, each would end up dominated by their adjacent superpower.
Let’s face it, if trump wants Greenland, his going to get it. A united Europe could stop him, but that would never happen, and anything less hasn’t got a hope of stopping the US.
All its doing is dividing NATO and making it easier for Putin as NATO nations worry about greenland rather than supporting ukraine.
What a stable world we currently live in.
Bizarrely I think this would in the end play badly for Putin .. essentially Trump takes Greenland and Europe walks away from the US for ever.. it will become immensely focused on both securing its eastern border.. completing with the US in the Atlantic and high north and taking geostrategic control of Africa and the western Indian Ocean.. it will also no longer care about containing China because Europe and China would suddenly have a shared enemy and no real geostrategic area of conflict.. and Xi is only interested in what is good for China.. if he sees Europe as a geostrategic counter to the US then Russia will be put back in its box ( with probably a bit trimmed off for good measure).. in having to compete geostrategicly with the US the 500 million population 26 trillion dollar economy that is Europe would become a military superpower in very short order.. Europe has about 5 times the naval shipbuilding capacity than the US.. it would end up next door to a new superpower that was actually possibly quite able to live with China in. Reasonable way… essentially a disaster for Russia….
The US kicking Europe in the teath.. may just give it its purpose back.. the US would be in a really shit place as it would lose its ally and still be on a collision course with china.. a chinas that was now not bad trading buddies with Europe….
Wet dream. Europe can’t even align its nation states against Russia. Zero chance against the US.
And I think you are wrong.. Europe has been pretty unified against Russia.. the simple reality is Ukraine is not NATO or the EU.. stick a boot on an EU or NATO country and bet again.. it’s a US wet dream to think it could do this and get away with catastrophic consequence… it’s not Europe that’s delusional.
Jonathan,,, the best, biggest winner of this Greenland kerfuffle is Putin. Nato is in tatters and US is not trustworthy. Russia got far more than they ever dreamed of. US is more of a threat than Russia or China. Next, what ‘ concern’ will UK have when the 0range mobster uses the same threats on Canada??
Oh yes it’s an utter disaster.. but unfortunately in my view now what is done is done, NATO as was is essentially dead, its entire purpose was deterrence…the three Cs of deterrence are Capability, Credibility, and Communication.. you must have all three, Trump has destroyed the Credibility and communication element of the NATO deterrence therefore he has for all intent and purpose killed NATO. What we have left is essentially a dying body Agonal breathing, some European nations ( especially the UK ) are clinging to that dying body, in a kind of geopolitical and geostrategic grief.. they need to let go.
Luckily it shouldn’t happen. Trump can only declare war on Greenland/Denmark with Congress approval and that seems unlikely. He used national emergency powers for Venezuela but good luck justifying that Greenland is an imminent threat to the US.
Im afraid I think their are a couple of issues.. essentially the arguments in the US around executive power have occurred and basically there will be no challenges to the executive unless it essentially formally undertakes a fully declaration of war, I suspect much of the noise is about creating the smoke and mirrors to allow the excuse of an emergency.. he can use huge levels of military force with no check on his power.
But for me the big issue is that essentially the function of NATO was a a deterrent.. and a deterrent needs the 3 Cs Capability, Credibility, and Communication.. Trump has destroyed NATOs ability to communicate its credibility and so has essentially destroyed NATO …yes the capability of NATO is still there, but what we have is a dead body on the floor not a functioning organism…. And we do now have a job of replacing it, because to pretend it’s still anything at all in its present form is geostrategically deadly to Europe.
NATO died with Russia invasion of crimea. It’s inaction to deter further Russian aggression showed that. Instead of invading Ukraine, Russias next step at the time could have been to take a eastern bloc NATO member, as NATO did nothing to reinforce them. US focus had moved to China well before then.
Trump has just taken that to the next step.
It’s a fair point on Congress reaction to Venezuela, but I suspect might be different going after Greenland. Let’s face it Venezuela regime (still in power ironically) was evil and once it was done with no US deaths they let it slide. Would they do the same for a build up against Greenland.
To be honest Steve I get the impression that many Democrats and the last hold out traditional GOPs are a bit stunned and worried that the U.S. is sliding into civil strife.. I’m not sure they want challenge anything external…
I agree in regards to 2014, NATO did loss significant opportunity for communication of capability and credibility.. but in the end it all happened so fast it had not set any real red lines.. so I don’t think it was a critical wound.. it’s lack of any action to meaningful strengthen itself post 2014 was a massive wound…
I reckon we go with JEF and just add from there?
For us that works. For everyone else, the obvious answer is a military wing of the EU. It was looked into before but stopped because the US threw it’s toys out of the pram and insisted it would undermine NATO (aka reduce US Control of NATO).
Should not there be a semi permanent force of UK troops in Canada.?? Canada is huge but could easily afford to host military bases for UK, Nato troops. Maybe 6 bases with about 200 each. Then more troops if threats escalate. Camp Wainwright comes to mind, and Kingston and Bagotville. It could be regarded as Nato exercises without US.
BATUS exists you know?
It makes you wonder why Mr Rutte is not in Washington right now saying the Mr Trump W.T.F. Mr president are you doing or is the latest General secretary of Nato just as spineless as the people around Trump. Or has Mr Rutte seen through Mr Trump and realised this is just anouther ploy to divert attention away from Ukraine so that the man really running the Whitehouse Mr Putin can get away with even more genocide in Ukraine.
Texts that trump revealed basically show Rutte sycophantically agreeing with him.
You respond to a bully one way. You get one in to floor him. Close all US basing in Europe, especially in the UK. Time has come for action, diplomacy is dead.
Putin would love that. No thanks.
Only if he crosses the line, otherwise we run down the clock of NATO death to strengthen our and the EUs position as much as possible.
He has crossed it.
I would say he’s crossed the inevitable slow death.. but not the immediate. So I think we need to make it clear invading Greenland is a red line and if he Basel’s away take the slow death option.
Throw them out Diego Garcia
Facetiously:
The talks should have also included the UK, so talks about The UK taking back america can be discussed after the failed (250yr old) experiment.
.
.
Of course, there will need to be a tea and stamp tax to make such a acquisition feasible – the yanks seem happy with no representation with the dump (sic) administration (double sic) – feel free to reverse the application of the double sic 🙃
We should threaten to take away Trump’s golf resorts in Scotland, which would make him back off. 🙂
You have to give kudos to Jonathan for his wisdom, Dern for his words.
However. A different scenario, floating a kite and skiing down a mountain.
Finland, Sweden, Norway, Denmark, Holland, Canada, Holland and Britain have arctic trained forces – some of them are very specialised…
You could, with political will, put a Division into Greenland that through asymmetric fighting make Ukraine look like a play park; US public opinion is febrile at the moment, seeing several thousand US service boys and girls returning home in body bags because of a made President would not in my opinion curry favour with his madness, indeed the opposite.
rNATO need to mount a Div scale exercise in Greenland that would tell US military planners, any thoughts of invasion are untenable and would result in horrendous casualties.
Cue, Jonathan and the EU would kick US companies out of Europe (but the threat is having no discernible effect at the moment(?) ) and destroy their industrial/commercial base.
NATO would have one hell of a re-org but US troops could look forward to spending the rest of their European deployments in the good old US of A.
The EU and allies need to be firm and deploy a Div to Greenland and be prepared to take stupid ;murican blood.
There will be be small units of European SOF there already, noting the Dane SOF use Greenland as their backyard for arctic warfare and my money would be on the yanks, as you suggested to wish they were in Ukraine.
.
.
A large SOF contingent is not necessary to cause any invading yanks serious issues. Of course the US radar facility would be fair game, indeed that and fuel sources used for heating, electrics and cooking would be P1 targets, damage the runway and of course there goes their resupply.
.
.
You would have to be a complete and utter idiot to invade Greenland, so yeah, it will be on small-hand dump’s mind since his ego is bigger than his actual IQ. WHEN any ‘special military operation’ goes south, I’d expect any republican, not wanting to be lynched by continuing supported the idiot, to jump on the implement band-waggon.
typo: impeachment (Editor: 1 vote to restore the edit button for 5min after posting)
Okay, so; putting a division into Greenland is risky for both sides. Whether the 11th Airborne or the a composite force of the Nordland Brigade, RM, Fins and Norwegians go ashore, Greenland has very little infrastructure, few ports, and the ones that exist are small, and only a few small airstrips. A divisional or Brigade deployment might be a good signal but if things get hot they are completely reliant on SLOC’s.
In that respect both sides have advantages and disadvantages.
US advantage:
-It has a navy much better suited to projecting Power in this manner, a better sea lift capability and better SSN/Carriers.
-Much of Greenlands infrastructure faces to the West, including Nuuk. So easier for the US to control the bits that “count.”
-The East Coast is more mountainous, while the West coast is easier to deploy onto.
E/RNATO advantage:
-Through Svalbard, Canada and Iceland has land bases much closer to Greenland.
-American approaches to Greenland much more constrained and easier to control than European ones.
-Suspect it’s probably easier to mine the Western Greenland approaches than the Eastern ones.
Worth considering that for both sides, putting large amounts of material and manpower into Greenland is inherently risky.
Thanks Dern.