Explained: Will Trump’s play for Greenland break Nato? Marco Rubio to visit Denmark

US secretary of state Marco Rubio on Wednesday announced that he will be meeting officials in Denmark next week.“I’ll be meeting with them next week,” Rubio told news agency APThe demand for Greenland is not a hidden fact. Earlier, the Danish PM said that if the United States decided to attack another Nato country, which is Greenland, then everything would stop, including Nato.

Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen on Monday said that the Greenland takeover means the end of the Nato military alliance, DW reported.Frederiksen said that “everything would stop” when it comes to cooperation with Washington in the event of a US attack on another Nato member.“If the United States decides to attack another Nato country, then everything would stop — that includes Nato and therefore post-World War II security,” Frederiksen said.Trump’s “love-hate” for NatoTrump, from the very beginning, has made its clear about his intentions. Trump’s long-standing scepticism of Nato — from scolding “delinquent” allies to questioning whether America should defend Europe at all — has already rattled capitals across the continent. A recent summit papered over the cracks with higher defence pledges and flattery, but the fissures never really closed.During the 2024 election campaign, Donald Trump said he would not protect “delinquent” Nato members that did not meet the then target of spending 2% of GDP on defence. His defence secretary, Pete Hegseth, emphasised in February that the US was no longer “primarily focused” on defending Europe, as per the Guardian.The comments provoked alarm in Europe, but diplomacy ahead of June’s Nato summit appeared to have eased the problem. Nato allies, except Spain, agreed to lift defence spending to 3.5% of GDP by 2035, following comments by secretary general Mark Rutte, who called the US president “daddy”.While it seems that Trump has no interest in Nato, voila! new thing happened. In a post on Truth Social on Wednesday, Trump said that the US will always be there for Nato, even if they won’t be there for the country.“Remember, for all of those big Nato fans, they were at 2% GDP, and most weren’t paying their bills, UNTIL I CAME ALONG. The USA was, foolishly, paying for them! I, respectfully, got them to 5% GDP, AND THEY PAY, immediately. Everyone said that couldn’t be done, but it could, because, beyond all else, they are all my friends. Without my involvement, Russia would have ALL OF UKRAINE right now. Remember, also, I single-handedly ENDED 8 WARS, and Norway, a Nato Member, foolishly chose not to give me the Noble Peace Prize. But that doesn’t matter! What does matter is that I saved Millions of Lives,” he said in a post.Greenland crisis puts Nato’s red lines to the testEurope’s postwar security order faces a potential breaking point if the United States moves to annex Greenland in 2026. European leaders increasingly believe the Trump White House is seriously considering such a step, framing it as a matter of Arctic security while quietly exploring diplomatic, legal and economic pathways to assert control. For Europe, the stakes go far beyond Greenland’s 57,000 residents: a US annexation of Nato territory would shatter the assumption that Washington remains a reliable ally rather than a predatory power. Yet Europe’s response options are painfully limited. The continent is still deeply dependent on US military capabilities, intelligence and nuclear deterrence, and its rearmament drive will take years to mature. That dependence has already been exploited, most notably when Europe accepted punitive trade tariffs to avoid provoking a US withdrawal from Ukraine and Nato. Greenland now looks like a replay of the same coercive playbook, Times magazine reported.US officials argue Denmark cannot adequately secure the Arctic against Russia and China, but European leaders counter that existing Nato frameworks already give Washington extensive military access. This fuels suspicion that the real objective is territorial expansion rather than security.What will happen to Nato if US took Greenland?Nato’s membership might not change even if the US took Greenland, as the treaty had no clear provision for expelling a country. Its preamble committed the US and other allies “to live in peace with all peoples and all governments” and “to safeguard the freedom, common heritage and civilisation of their peoples”, wording once intended for use against a member that became communist during the Cold War.One alliance member turning on another, even over an Arctic territory with a population of less than 60,000, would undermine the credibility of the 76-year-old military alliance intended to ensure peace and mutual protection across Europe and the North Atlantic.Marion Messmer, a director at the Chatham House thinktank, said the latest threats had already caused damage at a time when the Russian menace felt more real, even as Moscow remained heavily embroiled in Ukraine. “If any European states harbour any illusions they can rely on US security guarantees, then this is the wake-up call we are not returning to that world,” Messmer said.