NATO Must Act To Counter Trump’s Instability

Greenland and Denmark need protection and only the other NATO members countries can provide it

By now, it is clear that Donald Trump is determined to either buy or take Greenland by force. The question is, what can be done to stop him. The answer is that NATO is the sole bulwark against this insane project.

NATO member nations can respond by not only treating this as a crisis of the alliance, but a case of aggression by a member country against another. The NATO alliance has tools at its disposal to check Trump. That leverage is economic and political, and it is meaningful.

The primary response requires separation of the requirement of defense cooperation from economic dependence on the United States. The actions must be specific and targeted measures and they must be reversible to account for the policy changes that will accompany a new Democratic administration. They must ratchet up the pressure on Trump while building up Greenland’s and Denmark’s potential leverage in response.

A first step is to declare a firm red line where Greenland is concerned. Canada and other member nations must make it clear that any action against Greenland would represent an act that is incompatible with membership in NATO. It is true that Trump may not care, and there is no provision for expulsion.

This will not alone stop Trump, but it makes clear to the American people and Congress which support NATO by large margins that the price to be paid is far too high. It would send the message that this would be the effective end of NATO and a major break with Europe, rather than some real estate deal that satisfies Trump’s “psychological” needs (his words, not mine).

Europe has to foreclose the economic pressure points Trump is attempting to exploit. This is especially the case with respect to the idea that Denmark and Greenland can be coerced and bullied.

The EU should combine increased grants, guarantees of future investment and long-term security assurances. The same is the case with promises to protect Greenland’s and Denmark’s access to energy resources. This would help obviate dependence on the United States and China.

European nations must accelerate investment in development banks and national funding to pay for energy and myriad infrastructure needs. This makes it hard for Trump to make the case that only the United States can finance Greenland’s development.

The real NATO leverage comes in the form of trade measures, regulation and finance. For example, NATO member states could cut off the trade deals Trump is desperate to make. This would blunt Trump’s threats to use trade as leverage against Denmark. These ideas are already under discussion among NATO members.

If Trump ratchets up the pressure, the U.S. can respond in kind. Trump could quickly put boots on the ground. The response becomes highly targeted sanctions. The model could be that used against Russia in 2022. It could involve sanctioning Trump officials, contractors and any companies involved in the fostering of an illegal, aggressive action against Greenland and Denmark.

If the EU wants to go further, it could deny visas, freeze assets held in NATO member countries, ban the United States from procurement of various products and cut off access to European capital sources. Other symbolic steps are feasible. One is to end NATO summits in the U.S.

Europe can also stop weapons purchases from the United States, and tighten regulation against the U.S. The audience would be NATO’s friends in the U.S., as well as corporate entities that would be harmed.

Ultimately, NATO needs to strengthen the security of its member countries. This would serve as a long-term means of protection against American instability. As much as we would like to believe that it is the case, there is no guarantee we won’t have another Trump in the future.

None of this solves the fundamental problem that the president of the United States is off his rocker. But a combination of economic, trade and sanctions measures would send a clear message to the larger American audience that there is a price to be paid for Trump’s aggression. Trump is impervious to such influence. An increasingly restive Congress and a fed up American people are not.