Potential economic sanctions and other international response options create deterrent threats that could complicate President Trump’s Greenland annexation campaign if he proceeds toward military action, though the unprecedented nature of the situation—with the world’s most powerful nation threatening a small ally—creates uncertainties about whether traditional diplomatic and economic pressure tools would prove effective against determined American aggression.
European nations could theoretically impose economic sanctions on the United States similar to measures Western nations have employed against Russia, Iran, and other states deemed to have violated international norms. Such sanctions might target specific American officials, companies involved in Greenlandic resource extraction, or broader trade relationships. However, the economic interconnections between the United States and Europe create enormous costs and practical obstacles to comprehensive sanctions that might exceed European willingness to bear.
NATO collective response mechanisms provide another potential avenue, though the unprecedented situation of the alliance’s most powerful member attacking another member creates scenarios that alliance founders never anticipated. European NATO members could theoretically invoke Article 5 collective defense obligations, though actually implementing military responses against the United States would be practically impossible and strategically absurd. The alliance would more likely simply dissolve as Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen warned.
International legal mechanisms including the International Court of Justice and UN Security Council could provide forums for Danish and Greenlandic legal challenges to American actions. However, American veto power in the Security Council would prevent any binding resolutions, while ICJ jurisdiction depends on state consent that the United States could refuse. These legal avenues might generate moral authority and international solidarity but likely lack enforcement mechanisms capable of actually preventing American military action if Trump determines to proceed.
Greenland Prime Minister Jens-Frederik Nielsen demanded Trump cease his pressure campaign. European nations unified in support of Denmark with the EU, Britain, France, and Nordic countries all affirming territorial integrity. The international response options create potential costs for Trump’s annexation campaign but face severe limitations when confronting determined American aggression. The unprecedented nature of a superpower attacking an ally creates scenarios where traditional diplomatic and economic tools may prove insufficient, potentially leaving international law and norms defenseless against overwhelming military force if Trump chooses to disregard alliance relationships and international opinion.
