ReportWire

Tag: Denmark

  • EU Warns of Downward Spiral After Trump Threatens Tariffs Over Greenland

    [ad_1]

    BRUSSELS, Jan 17 (Reuters) – European ‌Union ​leaders on Saturday ‌warned of a “dangerous downward spiral” over ​U.S. President Donald Trump’s vow to implement increasing ‍tariffs on European allies ​until the U.S. is allowed to ​buy ⁠Greenland.

    “Tariffs would undermine transatlantic relations and risk a dangerous downward spiral. Europe will remain united, coordinated, and committed to upholding its sovereignty,” European Commission ‌President Ursula von der Leyen and EU Council President ​Antonio Costa ‌said in posts ‍on ⁠X.

    The bloc’s top diplomat Kaja Kallas said tariffs would hurt prosperity on both sides of the Atlantic, while distracting the EU from its “core task” of ending Russia’s war in Ukraine.

    “China and Russia ​must be having a field day. They are the ones who benefit from divisions among allies,” Kallas said on X.

    “Tariffs risk making Europe and the United States poorer and undermine our shared prosperity. If Greenland’s security is at risk, we can address this inside NATO.”

    Ambassadors from the European Union’s ​27 countries will convene on Sunday for an emergency meeting to discuss their response to the tariff threat.

    (Reporting by Bart Meijer ​and Phil Blenkinsop, Editing by Mark Potter and Chris Reese)

    Copyright 2026 Thomson Reuters.

    Photos You Should See – January 2026

    [ad_2]

    Reuters

    Source link

  • Denmark And Cannabis

    [ad_1]

    Cannabis and Denmark collide as culture, health policy, alcohol use, and happiness shape the country’s evolving cannabis debate.

    Denmark, the Danish Royal Family and Greenland have been in the news. This leaves us wondering, what about Denmark and cannabis? The country’s relationship with cannabis sits at the intersection of tradition, public health, and an evolving cultural conversation about substances, happiness, and social responsibility. While the country is often seen as progressive, cannabis remains illegal for recreational use, even as public debate and medical acceptance continue to grow.

    Related: What’s Up With Happy Finland And Marijuana

    Under Danish law, recreational cannabis is prohibited, and possession can result in fines or legal penalties. In practice, however, enforcement is generally measured. Small amounts intended for personal use often lead to warnings or modest fines rather than severe punishment. Despite its illegal status, cannabis is the most commonly used illicit substance in Denmark. Health authorities estimate roughly one in ten Danes aged 16 to 44 report recent cannabis use, reflecting a level of normalization in everyday life even without legalization.

    The Danish Royal Family

    Denmark has taken a more formal step forward with medical cannabis. In 2018, the government introduced a national medical cannabis pilot program, allowing doctors to prescribe cannabis-based products for conditions such as chronic pain, multiple sclerosis, and chemotherapy-related symptoms. The program has since been extended and broadened, signaling institutional recognition cannabis can have therapeutic value when regulated and medically supervised.

    Alcohol, meanwhile, has long been deeply woven into Danish culture. Denmark consistently ranks among Europe’s highest consumers of alcohol, particularly when it comes to binge drinking. Social drinking is common across generations, and alcohol is widely available and socially accepted. But like the United States, recent studies suggest changing attitudes among younger Danes, with declining rates of both alcohol and cannabis use among teens and young adults. Public health campaigns, wellness trends, and shifting social norms appear to be influencing these behaviors.

    These substance use patterns exist alongside Denmark’s global reputation for happiness. According to the World Happiness Report, Denmark routinely ranks in the top three happiest countries in the world. Factors contributing to this ranking include strong social trust, universal healthcare, work-life balance, economic security, and a high degree of confidence in public institutions. The country’s happiness score typically sits around 7.5 out of 10, well above the global average.

    RELATED: Science Says Medical Marijuana Improves Quality Of Life

    An often-overlooked influence on Danish cultural norms is the Danish royal family. The monarchy, while largely ceremonial, plays a powerful symbolic role in shaping national identity. The royal family is widely respected and known for its emphasis on stability, duty, and social cohesion. Members of the monarchy tend to avoid political controversy, including debates around cannabis or drug policy, instead focusing on public service, health initiatives, environmental causes, and cultural unity. Their restrained and disciplined public image reinforces Denmark’s broader cultural preference for moderation and responsibility, even as society debates reform in areas like cannabis regulation.

    In many ways, Denmark’s cannabis conversation mirrors the nation itself: pragmatic, cautious, and grounded in public welfare rather than ideology. While full legalization remains off the table for now, medical access, shifting attitudes, and open debate suggest Denmark’s approach will continue to evolve. Set against a backdrop of high alcohol use, declining youth consumption, a respected monarchy, and one of the happiest populations on Earth, cannabis in Denmark is less about rebellion and more about how a stable society manages change.

    [ad_2]

    Anthony Washington

    Source link

  • The Longest Underwater Tunnel Connecting Germany and Denmark

    [ad_1]

    The fixed link across the Fehmarn Belt represents an immersed tunnel that will connect the island of Lolland in Denmark with the island of Fehmarn in Germany.

    This impressive tunnel beneath the Baltic Sea, which is expected to be one of the longest underwater structures in the world, is scheduled to be completed by 2029.

    Project Scope, Length, and Financing

    Photo Courtesy: Autorepublika.

    The Fehmarnbelt Tunnel, with a length of 18 kilometers, will significantly shorten travel time between Scandinavia and continental Europe. The company Femern states that the tunnel is “the largest infrastructure project in Denmark and the longest immersed road and rail tunnel in the world.” Estimated costs amount to around 7.37 billion euros, while the European Union has approved approximately 1.3 billion euros for this project.

    Representatives of Femern explain that an immersed tunnel is “a safe, proven, and efficient way to construct an underwater tunnel.”

    “The technology was developed in Denmark and is based on experience, among other things, with the Øresund Tunnel.”

    Maritime Safety and Operational Security

    Underwater tunnel

    Photo Courtesy: Autorepublika.

    Once completed, the tunnel will not represent an obstacle to maritime traffic in the Fehmarn Belt. Maritime safety is also a top priority during the construction phase.

    “The Fehmarnbelt Tunnel will be just as safe as a corresponding section of highway above ground. It is equipped with continuous emergency lanes and emergency exits along its entire length.”

    A Landmark Engineering Achievement

    Underwater tunnel

    Photo Courtesy: Autorepublika.

    The Institution of Civil Engineers explains that the Fehmarnbelt Tunnel will lie directly on the seabed, making it “an exceptional engineering feat.”

    “With a weight of as much as 73,500 tons per element, these colossal structures are proof of modern engineering. When one segment is ready for transport, watertight bulkheads are installed at both ends, and the section is then carefully towed into position using tugboats.

    A total of 89 elements will be connected one after another, like assembling giant Lego blocks, to form the complete tunnel.”

    This article originally appeared on Autorepublika.com and has been republished with permission by Guessing Headlights.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Vance, Rubio meet with Greenland and Denmark’s foreign ministers

    [ad_1]

    Vice President JD Vance, Secretary of State Marco Rubio and other White House officials met Wednesday with Danish and Greenlandic foreign ministers amid the Trump administration’s ongoing threats to take over Greenland

    The meeting came one day after Greenland’s Prime Minister Jens-Frederik Nielsen said at a news conference, “If we have to choose between the United States and Denmark here and now, we choose Denmark.”

    President Trump has repeatedly said he wants to acquire Greenland, a semi-autonomous territory of Denmark, citing national security reasons. He repeated that again on Wednesday morning, saying “it is vital for the Golden Dome that we are building” and that “NATO should be leading the way for us to get it.”

    “IF WE DON’T, RUSSIA OR CHINA WILL, AND THAT IS NOT GOING TO HAPPEN!” Mr. Trump said in a post on Truth Social. 

    “NATO becomes far more formidable and effective with Greenland in the hands of the UNITED STATES,” he said. “Anything less than that is unacceptable.”

    On Tuesday, Mr. Trump told reporters that if Greenland’s premier said the territory wanted to stay part of Denmark, “that’s their problem.”

    “I disagree with him,” Mr. Trump said. “I don’t know who he is, don’t know anything about him, but that’s going to be a big problem for him.” 

    Leaders of both Denmark and Greenland have stated Greenland is “not for sale,” which has led Trump officials to say that the administration is considering all options, including military force. 

    “I’d love to make a deal with them. It’s easier,” Mr. Trump said Sunday. “But one way or the other, we’re going to have Greenland.” Rubio has downplayed the possibility of military force to acquire Greenland.

    Vance visited Greenland last year. Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen said Tuesday that the Trump administration is applying “completely unacceptable pressure from our closest ally.” 

    Frederiksen said earlier this month that an American military move to seize control of Greenland would amount to the end of the NATO military alliance. Denmark is a NATO member, and NATO’s Article 5 states that if a NATO ally suffers an armed attack, all members will consider it an attack on them as well and do what they need to aid the attacked nation.

    Tensions were high ahead of the meeting, as was concern about a further fracturing of the relationship with the U.S. NATO ally, sources familiar with the situation told CBS News. The Danish government expected to present an offer for enhanced cooperation with the U.S. and access in Greenland in terms of military presence and NATO presence, the sources said.

    The Danes wanted clarity on what the U.S. is pressing for beyond that offer, and whether a financial plus-up is being demanded, the sources said. They wanted to know if Mr. Trump’s intent is to have control or political ownership, which concerns them, given the clear objection of the Greenlandic government to either. Greenlandic officials have been clear that they want the island to belong to Denmark.

    A European official from a nearby country said there is some concern that Denmark may be miscalculating by demanding this meeting with the U.S. because it could formalize and potentially harden positions around what could otherwise be rhetorical pressure by Mr. Trump.

    On Wednesday, Republican Sen. Mitch McConnell of Kentucky took to the Senate floor to voice his disapproval of intervening in Greenland’s affairs and to emphasize the importance of maintaining a united NATO alliance. 

    “Unless and until the President can demonstrate otherwise, then the proposition at hand today is very straightforward: incinerating the hard-won trust of loyal allies in exchange for no meaningful change in U.S. access to the Arctic,” McConnell said. “That’s allies – plural. Because this is about more than Greenland. It’s about more than America’s relationship with its highly capable Nordic allies. It’s about whether the United States intends to face a constellation of strategic adversaries with capable friends … or commit an unprecedented act of strategic self-harm and go it alone.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Greenland’s prime minister says “we choose Denmark” over the U.S.

    [ad_1]

    Greenland‘s prime minister said “we choose Denmark” over the U.S., on the eve of Wednesday’s meeting between the foreign ministers of Greenland and Denmark, Vice President JD Vance, Secretary of State Marco Rubio and other Trump administration officials.

    “If we have to choose between the United States and Denmark here and now, we choose Denmark,” Greenlandic Prime Minister Jens-Frederik Nielsen said at a news conference Tuesday in Copenhagen. “We choose NATO. We choose the Kingdom of Denmark. We choose the EU.”   

    Nielsen appeared with Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen, who said “there are many indications that the most challenging part is ahead of us,” according to AFP. 

    Vance, who visited Greenland last year, will be hosting Danish and Greenlandic foreign ministers — along with Rubio — at the White House, a source familiar with the planning confirmed to CBS News. 

    President Trump has repeatedly said he wants to acquire Greenland, a semi-autonomous territory of Denmark, citing national security reasons.

    “If we don’t take Greenland, Russia or China will take Greenland, and I am not going to let that happen,” Mr. Trump said Sunday.

    “I’d love to make a deal with them. It’s easier,” he added. “But one way or the other, we’re going to have Greenland.” Rubio has downplayed the possibility of military force to acquire Greenland.

    But leaders of both Denmark and Greenland have stated Greenland is “not for sale,” which has led Trump officials to say that the administration is considering all options, including military force. 

    “One thing must be clear to everyone: Greenland does not want to be owned by the United States. Greenland does not want to be governed by the United States. Greenland does not want to be part of the United States,” Nielsen said Tuesday.

    Denmark has been one of the U.S.’ staunchest NATO allies for more than 75 years. Frederiksen said of the U.S. there’s been “completely unacceptable pressure from our closest ally.”

    Senate Democrats and a few Republicans have expressed opposition to military action against Greenland. Democratic Sen. Tim Kaine of Virginia said Sunday on “Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan” that any military action in Greenland would be “disastrous.” He added that he believes “Congress will stop him, both Democrats and Republicans.” 

    Republican Sen. Rand Paul told “CBS Mornings” last week that he would “do everything to stop any kind of military takeover of Greenland.” But Paul did not object to purchasing Greenland, noting that the U.S. has acquired territory in the past.

    The Constitution says only Congress can declare war, and the Senate last week advanced a war powers resolution to limit the Trump administration’s ability to conduct further strikes Venezuela. Five Republicans joined all the Democrats in advancing the resolution, indicating a lack of support for any military action in Greenland. Democratic Sen. Reuben Gallego said last week that he expected to introduce a measure “to block Trump from invading Greenland.”

    A bipartisan group of House members introduced legislation on Monday to prevent military action against NATO members, according to Politico

    Rep. Don Bacon, one of the sponsors of the legislation, said last week that he thought any action in Greenland is wrong.

     “These are our allies,” he continued. “You don’t treat your allies this way. I mean it’s embarrassing. And by the way, most Greenlanders want to be Greenland. They don’t want to be American. They want to be our allies, though, and it’s creating a lot of anger and hurt with our friends in Europe.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Maps show why Greenland is so important as the Arctic warms

    [ad_1]

    President Trump has said repeatedly that he wants the United States to control Greenland, refusing to take military action off the table and declaring that he will make the semi-autonomous Danish territory part of the U.S. “one way or the other.”

    Mr. Trump says the U.S. needs to control the vast, largely frozen island that sits mostly inside the Arctic Circle for security reasons, accusing China and Russia of trying to take it over instead.

    Greenland’s own democratically elected leaders have rejected any U.S. takeover, with the island’s government calling it something they “cannot accept under any circumstance.”

    There are a number of reasons why Greenland is of such intense interest to the Trump administration, including its natural resources —  reserves of oil, natural gas and rare earth minerals. But the physical location of the island on the map — and the sea ice melting around its borders — is also of vital importance.

    New routes around the globe

    Melting Arctic sea ice has created more opportunity to use northern shipping routes — allowing logistics companies to save millions of dollars in fuel by taking much shorter paths between Asia and Western Europe and the United States.  Northern routes were long only passable in warmer months.

    Arctic sea routes

    CBS News


    There are a couple primary routes through the Arctic becoming more viable, the Northern Sea Route (NSR), which follows Russia’s roughly 15,000-mile northern border. That path doesn’t bring ships too close to Greenland, and Russia and China have agreed to develop the route together, and have been making greater use of it in recent years.

    A Russian commercial vessel, aided by an icebreaker, first traversed the NSR in the winter in February 2021, proving it was possible.  

    The other route, called the Northwest Passage, comes much closer to Greenland’s coastal waters and is more likely the path the Trump administration is concerned with.

    The other, longstanding way to get goods from ports in Russia or the manufacturing powerhouses of East Asia is to go south. But that course, through Egypt’s Suez Canal, is about 3,000 miles longer.

    According to the Arctic Institute, compared to the Suez Canal route, the Northern Sea Route can save shippers as much as 50% in costs, considering fuel and other expenses, by reducing the distance from Japan to Europe, for instance, to only about 10 days compared to the roughly 22 it would take to sail around the southern tip of Africa and then through the Suez Canal. 

    A 2024 analysis by the Middlebury Institute of International Studies also said the northern route would shave about 10 days of a similar journey from Shanghai, China, to Rotterdam in the Netherlands.

    As sea temperatures continue warming and winter ice cover shrinks, shipping traffic via the north is likely to increase, so control over that passage — and the long Greenlandic coastline that it skirts — will be of greater importance.

    The U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration shared graphs in 2022 predicting the new routes that would become available to regular tankers around Greenland over the coming decades.

    arc22-arcticshipping-berkman-fig1-1536x998.jpg

    Graphics shared by the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration in 2022 show the sea routes through the Arctic that are expected to become viable to regular vessels (in blue) and polar-class vessels (in red) around Greenland over the coming decades.

    NOAA


    NOAA’s modeling shows a dramatic increase in viable journeys for both polar-class vessels fortified to forge through sea ice, and normal open water-faring ships. The agency even predicts that by 2059, it will likely be possible for a polar-class vessel to sail the most direct route, right across the North Pole, as the formation of sea ice reduces further.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Germany’s Merz Expects US Participation in Greenland’s Protection

    [ad_1]

    AHMEDABAD, India, Jan ‌12 (Reuters) – ​Germany’s Chancellor ‌Friedrich Merz said on ​Monday he expects the ‍United States to ​continue to ​protect ⁠Greenland together with Denmark but ongoing talks would determine the exact nature of the ‌collaboration.

    “We are in very detailed ​discussions with ‌the Danish ‍government ⁠and simply want to work together to improve the security situation for Greenland,” Merz told reporters in ​the Indian city of Ahmedabad.

    “I expect the Americans to also participate in this,” he said, adding that talks over the next few days and weeks would show in ​what form that would happen.

    (Reporting by Reinhard Becker and Maria MartinezWriting by ​Ludwig Burger; editing by Matthias Williams)

    Copyright 2026 Thomson Reuters.

    Photos You Should See – January 2026

    [ad_2]

    Reuters

    Source link

  • Trump administration officials to meet with Danish officials about Greenland on Wednesday, sources say

    [ad_1]

    Trump administration officials are set to meet with Danish officials about Greenland on Wednesday, diplomatic sources tell CBS News.

    The meeting, which has not been officially announced, comes after Secretary of State Marco Rubio told Congress last week that President Trump is interested in purchasing the Danish territory. The White House also said Tuesday officials are discussing a wide range of options for acquiring Greenland, including using the U.S. military to take it by force.

    While Rubio had downplayed the threat of military force in his remarks to reporters, Mr. Trump doubled down on the possibility Friday, saying, “I would like to make a deal the easy way, but if we don’t do it the easy way, we’re going to do it the hard way.”

    Sen. Tim Kaine, who met with Danish officials last week, said on Sunday that he thinks Democrats and Republicans in Congress would unite to stop any military action aimed at taking Greenland. “We’re not going to do it the hard way, and we’re not going to do it the easy way,” he said on “Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan.”

    “Either we’re going to continue to work with Denmark as a sovereign nation that we’re allied with, and we’re not going to treat them as an adversary or as an enemy,” the Democrat said.

    Mr. Trump told the New York Times in an interview published last week that ownership of Greenland, the world’s largest island, was important because “that’s what I feel is psychologically needed for success.” Mr. Trump has repeatedly said he feels the U.S. needs to acquire Greenland for defense purposes.

    The escalatory language by the president in recent weeks has further stressed already strained relations with European allies. Multiple European diplomats told CBS News that they increasingly understand that America’s commitment to the defense of Europe and NATO is no longer as ironclad as it has been over the past decades — or even the past few years of the war in Ukraine, during which the U.S. rallied European countries to unify against Russian aggression. One diplomat told CBS News that the Greenland situation is a potential breaking point.

    Louisiana GOP Gov. Jeff Landry, who Mr. Trump appointed as special envoy to Greenland last month, wrote Sunday on X that “History matters. The U.S. defended Greenland’s sovereignty during WWII when Denmark couldn’t.”

    “After the war, Denmark re-occupied it—side stepping and ignoring UN protocol. This should be about hospitality, not hostility,” Landry said.

    In response, Denmark’s Ambassador to the U.S. Jesper Møller Sørensen said “facts matter too,” and pointed out Greenland “has been a part of the Kingdom of Denmark for centuries.” He also emphasized that last week, all five of Greenland’s parties in Parliament repeated they don’t want to become part of the U.S.

    “We don’t want to be Americans, we don’t want to be Danes, we want to be Greenlanders,” Greenland Prime Minister Jens-Frederik Nielsen and four party leaders said in a statement Friday night.

    Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen said earlier this month that an American military move to seize control of Greenland would amount to the end of the NATO military alliance. Denmark is a NATO member, and NATO’s Article 5 states that if a NATO ally suffers an armed attack, all members will consider it an attack on them as well and do what they need to aid the attacked nation. 

    “This would be disastrous,” Kaine said on “Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan.” It wouldn’t just be the end of NATO, it would be America alone.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • UK, Germany Discuss NATO Forces in Greenland to Calm US Threat, Bloomberg News Reports

    [ad_1]

    Jan 11 (Reuters) – A ‌group ​of European ‌countries, led by Britain ​and Germany, is discussing ‍plans to boost ​their military ​presence ⁠in Greenland to show U.S. President Donald Trump that the continent is serious about ‌Arctic security, Bloomberg News reported ​on Sunday.

    Germany ‌will propose ‍setting up ⁠a joint NATO mission to protect the Arctic region, the Bloomberg report added, citing people familiar ​with the plans.

    Trump said on Friday that the U.S. needs to own Greenland to prevent Russia or China from occupying it in the future. He has repeatedly said that ​Russian and Chinese vessels are operating near Greenland, something Nordic countries have ​rejected.

    (Reporting by Rishabh Jaiswal in Bengaluru)

    Copyright 2026 Thomson Reuters.

    Photos You Should See – January 2026

    [ad_2]

    Reuters

    Source link

  • Analysis-Denmark’s Greenland Dilemma: Defending a Territory Already on Its Way Out

    [ad_1]

    By Jacob Gronholt-Pedersen and Stine Jacobsen

    COPENHAGEN, Jan 10 (Reuters) – When U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio meets his Danish ‌and ​Greenlandic counterparts next week, Denmark will be defending a territory that ‌has been moving steadily away from it and towards independence since 1979.

    President Donald Trump’s threats to seize Greenland have triggered a wave of European solidarity ​with Denmark. But the crisis has exposed an uncomfortable reality – Denmark is rallying support to protect a territory whose population wants independence, and whose largest opposition party now wants to bypass Copenhagen and negotiate directly with Washington.

    “Denmark risks exhausting ‍its foreign policy capital to secure Greenland, only to ​watch it walk away afterwards,” said Mikkel Vedby Rasmussen, a political science professor at University of Copenhagen.

    Denmark cannot let Greenland go without losing its geopolitical relevance in the Arctic territory, strategically located between Europe and North America ​and a critical site for ⁠the U.S. ballistic missile defence system. 

    Yet it may ultimately have nothing to show for its efforts if Greenlanders choose independence – or strike their own deal with Washington.

    The stakes extend beyond Denmark’s national interests. European allies have rallied behind Denmark not just out of solidarity, but because giving up Greenland would set a dangerous precedent that could embolden other powers to pursue territorial claims against smaller nations, upending the post-1945 world order.

    Denmark’s foreign ministry declined to comment, but referred to joint remarks by Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen and Greenlandic Prime Minister Jens-Frederik Nielsen on December 22.

    “National borders and the sovereignty of ‌states are rooted in international law,” the two leaders said. “They are fundamental principles. You cannot annex another country … Greenland belongs to the Greenlanders.”

    This week, Frederiksen said: “If the U.S. chooses to attack another ​NATO ‌country, everything stops, including NATO and the security ‍the alliance has provided since World War Two.”

    For now, the Trump administration says all options are on the table, including buying the territory or taking it by force.

    Copenhagen professor Rasmussen said any discussion of whether holding on to Greenland is worth the cost has been drowned out by outrage at Trump’s threats.

    “It is not part of the political debate in Denmark. I fear we have gone into patriotic overdrive,” he said.

    During the Cold War, Greenland’s strategic location gave Denmark outsized influence in Washington and allowed it to maintain lower defence spending than would otherwise be expected of a NATO ally.

    This became known as “the Greenland Card”, according to a 2017 report by the University of Copenhagen’s Centre for Military Studies.

    But Greenland’s aspirations for self-determination have been brewing since the former colony got greater autonomy and its own parliament in 1979. A 2009 agreement explicitly recognised Greenlanders’ right to independence if they choose.

    All Greenlandic parties say they want independence, but differ on how, ​and when, to achieve it.

    Trump’s pressure has accelerated a timeline that was already in motion, forcing Copenhagen to spend political capital and financial resources on a relationship with an increasingly uncertain endpoint.

    “How much should we fight for someone who doesn’t really care about us?” Joachim B. Olsen, a political commentator and former Danish lawmaker, told Reuters.

    Copenhagen provides an annual block grant of roughly 4.3 billion Danish crowns ($610 million) to Greenland’s economy, which is near stagnation with GDP growth of just 0.2% in 2025.

    The central bank estimates an annual financing gap of approximately 800 million Danish crowns to make current public finances sustainable. Denmark also covers police, the justice system and defence – bringing total annual spending to just under $1 billion.

    In addition, Copenhagen last year announced a 42 billion Danish crowns ($6.54 billion) Arctic defence package in response to U.S. criticism that Denmark has not done enough to protect Greenland.

    Some reject framing the relationship in transactional terms, pointing to Denmark’s legal and moral obligations under international law and centuries of shared history.

    “We’re talking about family relations, long history of relations between Denmark and Greenland,” said Marc Jacobsen, associate professor at the Royal Danish Defence College. “So this is much more, it’s not just about defence and economy, it’s about feelings, it’s about culture.”

    Prime Minister Frederiksen faces a ​difficult balancing act, said Serafima Andreeva, researcher at Oslo-based Fridtjof Nansen Institute.

    For now, Denmark has little choice but to stand firm to maintain its diplomatic credibility, but in doing so risks the relationship with the United States at a time “when Russia is an accelerating threat and being on the U.S.’s bad side is no good for anyone in the West”.

    Frederiksen also faces an election this year, though Greenland has not been a major theme.

    “I don’t understand why we have to cling to this community with Greenland when they so badly want out of it,” ​Lone Frank, a Danish science writer and broadcaster, told Reuters. “To be completely honest, Greenland doesn’t inspire any sense of belonging in me.”

    (Reporting by Jacob Gronholt-Pedersen and Stine Jacobsen in Copenhagen; additional reporting by Soren Sirich Jeppesen and Tom Little; Editing by Alex Richardson)

    Copyright 2026 Thomson Reuters.

    Photos You Should See – January 2026

    [ad_2]

    Reuters

    Source link

  • Donald Trump Says ‘I Don’t Need International Law’ In Quest For World Dominance: ‘Only’ THIS ‘Can Stop Me’ – Perez Hilton

    [ad_1]

    Well, this is concerning…

    Donald Trump is once again serving up a quote that sounds less like a presidential soundbite and more like a rejected line from a supervillain origin movie. And yes, it’s as alarming as it is headline-ready.

    Related: Jimmy Kimmel THANKS Donald Trump?! Whoa!

    In a new interview with the New York Times that has everyone clutching their pearls, Trump made it clear that pesky little things like international laws, rules, and norms are more of a suggestion than an actual obstacle. When discussing his ever-expanding vision for American dominance on Thursday, he casually dropped this gem:

    “I don’t need international law. I’m not looking to hurt people.”

    Oh, okay! If you say so! Nothing says reassuring like dismissing international law in the same breath as claiming you’ll only have benevolent intentions… Yeah, tell that to the multiple civilians who’ve been killed of late..

    When the Times tried to gently nudge him back toward reality by pointing out that, yes, laws do apply, Trump doubled down with a rhetorical shrug that could be heard around the globe:

    “It depends what your definition of international law is.”

    WHAT?!

    Because definitions are so subjective, right? Gravity, laws, facts: all vibes-based, apparently. Sheesh…

    But wait, it gets better. According to Trump, there is exactly one thing holding him back from full-on global supremacy. And no, it’s not Congress, the courts, or literally the rest of the world. It’s this:

    “My own morality. My own mind. It’s the only thing that can stop me.”

    Take a moment, y’all. Breathe. Scream into a pillow if needed.

    This interview lands just days after US forces under Trump’s direction seized Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and first lady Cilia Flores during strikes on the city of Caracas before shipping them off to face narco terrorism charges. Venezuela may have an interim leader now, but Trump has been boasting America is basically running the show.

    Related: Trump Makes Rare Melania Marriage Confession — Reveals What She ‘Hates’ About Him!

    And why stop there? Greenland is still on his wishlist, too. To that end, Trump explained to the Times on Thursday that being allies with Denmark simply isn’t enough. He wants full ownership of the land mass. In his own words:

    “Because that’s what I feel is psychologically needed for success. I think that ownership gives you a thing that you can’t do with, you’re talking about a lease or a treaty. Ownership gives you things and elements that you can’t get from just signing a document.”

    Add this to past musings about Colombia, Cuba, Iran, and Mexico, and suddenly this feels less like foreign policy and more like a Monopoly board where someone flipped the table.

    Buckle up, y’all. Apparently the only thing between us and Trump’s global takeover is… Trump. Yikes.

    [Image via MEGA/WENN]

    [ad_2]

    Perez Hilton

    Source link

  • What is Greenland’s status under international law?

    [ad_1]

    After capturing Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro and saying the U.S. was taking control of the South American country, President Donald Trump and others in his administration suggested that Greenland could be the next U.S. target.

    The day the U.S. took Maduro into custody to face U.S. drug-trafficking charges, Katie Miller, wife of senior White House aide Stephen Miller, posted on X a map of Greenland overlaid with the U.S. flag. “Soon,” the caption said. 

    The next day, CNN anchor Jake Tapper asked Stephen Miller about Greenland. It’s geographically the world’s largest island — about five times the size of California — and has about 56,000 residents. Denmark colonized it centuries ago, and later incorporated it into Denmark. 

    Miller said the Trump administration’s longstanding policy is that “Greenland should be part of the United States.” 

    When Tapper asked whether the administration would rule out military action, Miller said, “The real question is: By what right does Denmark assert control over Greenland? What is the basis of their territorial claim? What is their basis of having Greenland as a colony of Denmark?”

    White House spokesperson Anna Kelly told PolitiFact that Trump is “confident Greenlanders would be better served if protected by the United States from modern threats in the Arctic region.” 

    We asked experts about the history of the Denmark-Greenland relationship and Greenland’s status under international law. They agreed Greenland’s status as part of Denmark is rock solid and that any attempt to take over Greenland would flout international law.

    What the Trump administration has floated

    U.S. officials have repeatedly expressed interest in controlling Greenland, which is located between the United States and Europe. The naval corridor between Greenland, Iceland and the United Kingdom, called the “GIUK Gap,” is a strategic channel in the Arctic because it is a main transit route for Europe, the Americas and Russia. Greenland also has potentially valuable mineral deposits.

    “We need Greenland from the standpoint of national security,” Trump told reporters Jan. 4 aboard Air Force One. 

    Two days later, the White House issued a statement that Greenland is “vital to deter our adversaries in the Arctic region” and that Trump and his team are “discussing a range of options” which could include utilizing the U.S. military.

    If the United States did attempt to seize Greenland, it is unlikely to face military resistance, wrote Ivo Daalder, who served as U.S. ambassador to NATO under President Barack Obama.

    “Taking Greenland won’t be difficult,” Daalder wrote Jan. 6. “Its population of 50,000 won’t be able offer much resistance, nor will Denmark want to enter a fight it cannot win.” (Miller said something similar in his interview with Tapper: “Nobody’s going to fight the United States militarily over the future of Greenland.”)

    Daalder warned, though, that such U.S. military action could damage the credibility of NATO, the mutual defense pact the U.S. has led for decades. 

    “To suggest that American security in the Arctic requires that it owns Greenland implicitly indicates that the NATO security commitment is hollow and insufficient for its security,” Daalder wrote. “That’s hardly a reassuring message to the other 31 NATO members, many of whom face far more immediate threats than the United States.”

    What is the basis of Denmark’s claim to Greenland? 

    Denmark’s colonization of Greenland dates to the 1720s. In 1933, an international court settled a territorial dispute between Denmark and Norway, ruling that as of July 1931, Denmark “possessed a valid title to the sovereignty over all Greenland.” 

    In 1940, after Germany invaded Denmark, the U.S. assumed responsibility for Greenland’s defense and established a military presence on the island that remains today. 

    But Greenland has not been a colony for more than three-quarters of a century, said Diane Marie Amann, a University of Georgia emerita law professor.

    After World War II, colonialism “was decidedly rejected in the United Nations charter,” said Tom Ginsburg, a University of Chicago international law professor. 

    After the 1945 approval of the United Nations charter — the organization’s founding document and the foundation of much of international law — Denmark incorporated Greenland through a constitutional amendment and gave it representation in the Danish Parliament in 1953. Denmark told the United Nations that any colonial-type status had ended, and the United Nations General Assembly accepted this change in November 1954, said Greg Fox, a Wayne State University law professor. The United States voted to accept the new status.

    Since then, Greenland has, incrementally but consistently, moved toward greater autonomy. 

    Greenlandic political activists successfully pushed for and achieved home rule in 1979, which established its parliament. Today, Greenland is a district within the sovereign state of Denmark, Amann said, with two elected representatives in Denmark’s parliament. These representatives have full voting rights — greater authority than the U.S. gives congressional delegates for its territories such as Puerto Rico, Guam and the Virgin Islands.

    In 2008, Greenlanders voted 76% to 24% in favor of expanding the island’s autonomous status, in a non-binding referendum. This led to a 2009 law that recognized Greenlanders as a distinct people, as well as making Greenlandic the island’s official language and granting Greenland power over its mineral resources.

    A satellite photo highlighting Greenland, as well as Iceland and the Canadian Arctic Archipelago. (NASA/public domain)

    What is Greenland’s status under international law?

    The 2009 law established that the Greenlandic people have the power to pursue independence from Denmark if they choose. To date, they have not done so.

    While Danish law gives Greenland substantial local control, “That doesn’t mean that Greenland is any less a part of Denmark for international law purposes,” Fox said. “Because Greenland is fully incorporated into Denmark, it means that under international law, Denmark can both represent Greenland’s interests and people to other countries and can assert its rights if other countries cause it harm.”

    Fox compared Greenland’s status within Denmark to Michigan’s or Ohio’s within the U.S. “The U.S. represents their interests and the interests of their people to the rest of the international community,” he said. Denmark’s sovereignty “covers all its territory, including Greenland,” Fox said.

    The United Nations’ charter, to which the U.S. is a signatory, says members must refrain from threatening or using force “against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state.” Amann said this means that “no other country may assist or secure such a secession, whether by the actual use of military force or by threatening to use such force.” 

    If Greenland “wanted Denmark to transfer them to the United States, they might be able to request that,” Ginsburg said. “But that’s not the situation now.”

    U.S. history of recognizing Denmark’s authority over Greenland

    The U.S. has recognized Denmark’s “territorial sovereignty” over Greenland on multiple occasions, beyond the 1953 United Nations vote: 

    • The United States’ purchase of the Danish West Indies — now known as the U.S. Virgin Islands — included a 1917 agreement with Denmark that mentioned Greenland. Then-Secretary of State Robert Lansing said the U.S. government “will not object to the Danish Government extending their political and economic interests to the whole of Greenland.” 

    • In 1946, the U.S. under President Harry Truman formally proposed buying Greenland. Denmark declined to sell. 

    • In 1951, the U.S. signed a Greenland-related defense agreement with Denmark, which it updated in 2004. The agreement, which affirmed and outlined the American military’s presence, said in its first paragraph that Greenland’s status had changed “from colony to that of an equal part of the Kingdom of Denmark.”

    Collectively, the existence of these treaties “means the United States believed (Denmark) was the country with authority over Greenland,” Fox said.

    PolitiFact Researcher Caryn Baird contributed to this report.

    RELATED: Fact-checking Donald Trump on promised U.S. oil company investment in Venezuela

    RELATED: What are the charges against Venezuela’s Maduro? How can the US indict foreign politicians?

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Column: Trump’s 626 overseas strikes aren’t ‘America First.’ What’s his real agenda?

    [ad_1]

    Who knew that by “America First,” President Trump meant all of the Americas?

    In puzzling over that question at least, I’ve got company in Marjorie Taylor Greene, the now-former congresswoman from Georgia and onetime Trump devotee who remains stalwart in his America First movement. Greene tweeted on Saturday, just ahead of Trump’s triumphal news conference about the United States’ decapitation of Venezuela’s government by the military’s middle-of-the-night nabbing of Nicolás Maduro and his wife: “This is what many in MAGA thought they voted to end. Boy were we wrong.”

    Wrong indeed. Nearly a year into his second term, Trump has done nothing but exacerbate the domestic problems that Greene identified as America First priorities — bringing down the “increasing cost of living, housing, healthcare” within the 50 states — even as he’s pursued the “never ending military aggression” and foreign adventurism that America Firsters scorn, or at least used to. Another Trump con. Another lie.

    Here’s a stunning stat, thanks to Military Times: In 2025, Trump ordered 626 missile strikes worldwide, 71 more than President Biden did in his entire four-year term. Targets, so far, have included Yemen, Syria, Iraq, Somalia, Nigeria, Iran and the waters off Venezuela and Colombia. Lately he’s threatened to hit Iran again if it kills demonstrators who have been marching in Tehran’s streets to protest the country’s woeful economic conditions. (“We are locked and loaded and ready to go,” Trump posted Friday.)

    The president doesn’t like “forever wars,” he’s said many times, but he sure loves quick booms and cinematic secret ops. Leave aside, for now, the attacks in the Middle East, Africa and the Caribbean and the eastern Pacific. It’s Trump’s new claim to “run” Venezuela that has signaled the beginning of his mind-boggling bid for U.S. hegemony over the Western Hemisphere. Any such ambition raises the potential for quick actions to become quagmires.

    As Stephen Miller, perhaps Trump’s closest and most like-minded (read: unhinged) advisor, described the administration’s worldview on Monday to CNN’s Jake Tapper: “We live in a world, in the real world, Jake, that is governed by strength, that is governed by force, that is governed by power. These are iron laws of the world since the beginning of time.”

    You know, that old, amoral iron law: “Might makes right.” Music to Vladimir Putin’s and Xi Jinping’s ears as they seek hegemonic expansion of their own, confident that the United States has given up the moral high ground from which to object.

    But it was Trump, the branding maven, who gave the White House worldview its name — his own, of course: the Donroe Doctrine. And it was Trump who spelled out what that might mean in practice for the Americas, in a chest-thumping, war-mongering performance on Sunday returning to Washington aboard Air Force One. The wannabe U.S. king turns out to be a wannabe emperor of an entire hemisphere.

    “We’re in charge,” Trump said of Venezuela to reporters. “We’re gonna run it. Fix it. We’ll have elections at the right time.” He added, “If they don’t behave, we’ll do a second strike.” He went on, suggestively, ominously: “Colombia is very sick too,” and “Cuba is ready to fall.” Looking northward, he coveted more: “We need Greenland from a national security situation.”

    Separately, Trump recently has said that Colombia’s leftist President Gustavo Petro “does have to watch his ass,” and that, given Trump’s unhappiness with the ungenuflecting Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum, “Something’s going to have to be done with Mexico.” In their cases as well as Maduro’s, Trump’s ostensible complaints have been that each has been complacent or complicit with drug cartels.

    And yet, just last month Trump pardoned the former president of Honduras, Juan Orlando Hernández, who was convicted in a U.S. court and given a 45-year sentence for his central role in “one of the largest and most violent drug-trafficking conspiracies in the world.” Hernández helped traffickers ship 400 tons of cocaine into the United States — to “stuff the drugs up the gringos’ noses.” And Trump pardoned him after less than two years in prison.

    So it’s implausible that a few weeks later, the U.S. president truly believes in taking a hard line against leaders he suspects of abetting the drug trade. Maybe Trump’s real motivation is something other than drug-running?

    In his appearance after the Maduro arrest, Trump used the word “oil” 21 times. On Tuesday, he announced, in a social media post, of course, that he was taking control of the proceeds from up to 50 barrels of Venezuelan oil. (Not that he cares, but that would violate the Constitution, which gives Congress power to appropriate money that comes into the U.S. Treasury.)

    Or perhaps, in line with the Monroe Doctrine, our current president has a retro urge to dominate half the world.

    Lately his focus has been on Venezuela and South America, but North America is also in his sights. Trump has long said he might target Mexico to hit cartels and that the United States’ other North American neighbor, Canada, should become the 51st state. But it’s a third part of North America — Greenland — that he’s most intent on.

    The icy island has fewer than 60,000 people but mineral wealth that’s increasingly accessible given the climate warming that Trump calls a hoax. For him to lay claim isn’t just a problem for the Americas. It’s an existential threat to NATO given that Greenland is an autonomous part of NATO ally Denmark — as Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen warned.

    Not in 80 years did anyone imagine that NATO — bound by its tenet that an attack on one member is an attack on all — would be attacked from within, least of all from the United States. In a remarkable statement on Tuesday, U.S. allies rallied around Denmark: “It is for Denmark and Greenland, and them only, to decide on matters concerning Denmark and Greenland.”

    Trump’s insistence that controlling Greenland is essential to U.S. national security is nuts. The United States has had military bases there since World War II, and all of NATO sees Greenland as critical to defend against Russian and Chinese encroachment in the Arctic. Still, Trump hasn’t ruled out the use of force to take the island.

    He imagines himself to be the emperor of the Americas — all of it. Americas First.

    Bluesky: @jackiecalmes
    Threads: @jkcalmes
    X: @jackiekcalmes

    [ad_2]

    Jackie Calmes

    Source link

  • Trump says the US ‘needs’ Greenland for Arctic security. Here’s why

    [ad_1]

    Location, location, location: Greenland’s key position above the Arctic Circle makes the world’s largest island a key part of security strategy in the High North. But for whom?Increasing international tensions, global warming and the changing world economy have put Greenland at the heart of the debate over global trade and security, and U.S. President Donald Trump wants to make sure his country controls this mineral-rich country that guards the Arctic and North Atlantic approaches to North America.Greenland is a self-governing territory of Denmark, a longtime U.S. ally that has rejected Trump’s overtures. Greenland’s own government also opposes U.S. designs on the island, saying the people of Greenland will decide their own future. The island, 80% of which lies above the Arctic Circle, is home to about 56,000 mostly Inuit people who until now have been largely ignored by the rest of the world.Here’s why Greenland is strategically important to Arctic security: Greenland sits off the northeastern coast of Canada, with more than two-thirds of its territory lying within the Arctic Circle. That has made it crucial to the defense of North America since World War II, when the U.S. occupied Greenland to ensure it didn’t fall into the hands of Nazi Germany and to protect crucial North Atlantic shipping lanes.Following the Cold War, the Arctic was largely an area of international cooperation. But climate change is thinning the Arctic ice, promising to create a northwest passage for international trade and reigniting competition with Russia, China and other countries over access to the region’s mineral resources.Video below: Stephen Miller says ‘obviously Greenland should be part of the United States’ Greenland is also a rich source of the so-called rare earth minerals that are a key component of mobile phones, computers, batteries and other gadgets that are expected to power the world’s economy in the coming decades.That has attracted the interest of the U.S. and other Western powers as they try to ease China’s dominance of the market for these critical minerals.Development of Greenland’s mineral resources is challenging because of the island’s harsh climate, while strict environmental controls have proved an additional bulwark against potential investors. The U.S. Department of Defense operates the remote Pituffik Space Base in northwestern Greenland, which was built after the U.S. and Denmark signed the Defense of Greenland Treaty in 1951. It supports missile warning, missile defense and space surveillance operations for the U.S. and NATO.Greenland also guards part of what is known as the GIUK (Greenland, Iceland, United Kingdom) Gap, where NATO monitors Russian naval movements in the North Atlantic. Denmark is moving to strengthen its military presence around Greenland and in the wider North Atlantic. Last year, the government announced a roughly 14.6 billion kroner ($2.3 billion) agreement with parties including the governments of Greenland and the Faroe Islands, another self-governing territory of Denmark, to “improve capabilities for surveillance and maintaining sovereignty in the region.” The plan includes three new Arctic naval vessels, two additional long-range surveillance drones and satellite capacity.Denmark’s Joint Arctic Command is headquartered in Greenland’s capital, Nuuk, and tasked with the “surveillance, assertion of sovereignty and military defense of Greenland and the Faroe Islands,” according to its website. It has smaller satellite stations across the island.The Sirius Dog Sled Patrol, an elite Danish naval unit that conducts long-range reconnaissance and enforces Danish sovereignty in the Arctic wilderness, is also stationed in Greenland. In 2018, China declared itself a “near-Arctic state” in an effort to gain more influence in the region. China has also announced plans to build a “Polar Silk Road” as part of its global Belt and Road Initiative, which has created economic links with countries around the world.Then-U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo rejected China’s move, saying: “Do we want the Arctic Ocean to transform into a new South China Sea, fraught with militarization and competing territorial claims?”Meanwhile, Russian President Vladimir Putin has said Russia is worried about NATO’s activities in the Arctic and will respond by strengthening its military capability in the polar region. European leaders’ concerns were heightened following Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022. Stefanie Dazio in Berlin contributed to this report.

    Location, location, location: Greenland’s key position above the Arctic Circle makes the world’s largest island a key part of security strategy in the High North. But for whom?

    Increasing international tensions, global warming and the changing world economy have put Greenland at the heart of the debate over global trade and security, and U.S. President Donald Trump wants to make sure his country controls this mineral-rich country that guards the Arctic and North Atlantic approaches to North America.

    Greenland is a self-governing territory of Denmark, a longtime U.S. ally that has rejected Trump’s overtures. Greenland’s own government also opposes U.S. designs on the island, saying the people of Greenland will decide their own future.

    The island, 80% of which lies above the Arctic Circle, is home to about 56,000 mostly Inuit people who until now have been largely ignored by the rest of the world.

    Here’s why Greenland is strategically important to Arctic security:

    Greenland sits off the northeastern coast of Canada, with more than two-thirds of its territory lying within the Arctic Circle. That has made it crucial to the defense of North America since World War II, when the U.S. occupied Greenland to ensure it didn’t fall into the hands of Nazi Germany and to protect crucial North Atlantic shipping lanes.

    Following the Cold War, the Arctic was largely an area of international cooperation. But climate change is thinning the Arctic ice, promising to create a northwest passage for international trade and reigniting competition with Russia, China and other countries over access to the region’s mineral resources.

    Video below: Stephen Miller says ‘obviously Greenland should be part of the United States’


    Greenland is also a rich source of the so-called rare earth minerals that are a key component of mobile phones, computers, batteries and other gadgets that are expected to power the world’s economy in the coming decades.

    That has attracted the interest of the U.S. and other Western powers as they try to ease China’s dominance of the market for these critical minerals.

    Development of Greenland’s mineral resources is challenging because of the island’s harsh climate, while strict environmental controls have proved an additional bulwark against potential investors.

    The U.S. Department of Defense operates the remote Pituffik Space Base in northwestern Greenland, which was built after the U.S. and Denmark signed the Defense of Greenland Treaty in 1951. It supports missile warning, missile defense and space surveillance operations for the U.S. and NATO.

    Greenland also guards part of what is known as the GIUK (Greenland, Iceland, United Kingdom) Gap, where NATO monitors Russian naval movements in the North Atlantic.

    Denmark is moving to strengthen its military presence around Greenland and in the wider North Atlantic. Last year, the government announced a roughly 14.6 billion kroner ($2.3 billion) agreement with parties including the governments of Greenland and the Faroe Islands, another self-governing territory of Denmark, to “improve capabilities for surveillance and maintaining sovereignty in the region.”

    The plan includes three new Arctic naval vessels, two additional long-range surveillance drones and satellite capacity.

    Denmark’s Joint Arctic Command is headquartered in Greenland’s capital, Nuuk, and tasked with the “surveillance, assertion of sovereignty and military defense of Greenland and the Faroe Islands,” according to its website. It has smaller satellite stations across the island.

    The Sirius Dog Sled Patrol, an elite Danish naval unit that conducts long-range reconnaissance and enforces Danish sovereignty in the Arctic wilderness, is also stationed in Greenland.

    In 2018, China declared itself a “near-Arctic state” in an effort to gain more influence in the region. China has also announced plans to build a “Polar Silk Road” as part of its global Belt and Road Initiative, which has created economic links with countries around the world.

    Then-U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo rejected China’s move, saying: “Do we want the Arctic Ocean to transform into a new South China Sea, fraught with militarization and competing territorial claims?”

    Meanwhile, Russian President Vladimir Putin has said Russia is worried about NATO’s activities in the Arctic and will respond by strengthening its military capability in the polar region. European leaders’ concerns were heightened following Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022.

    Stefanie Dazio in Berlin contributed to this report.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Why does Trump want Greenland to be part of the U.S.?

    [ad_1]

    Why does the United States want control of Greenland? President Trump has made it clear that he thinks the U.S. needs to control the Arctic island to ensure the security of America and and its NATO allies, a point those allies — and Greenland — vehemently disagree with.

    But there’s more at play here, including a valuable shipping route and access to mineral resources.

    Here’s what interests the U.S. about the semi-autonomous Danish territory:

    “It’s so strategic right now” 

    Greenland spans about 836,000 square miles, much of it covered by the Greenland Ice Sheet. It’s home to only around 60,000 people and is a semi-autonomous territory of the Kingdom of Denmark with its own elected government.

    Getty/iStockphoto


    Its location between the U.S., Russia and Europe makes it strategic for both economic and defense purposes — especially as melting sea ice has opened up new shipping routes through the Arctic. It is also the location of the northernmost U.S. military base.

    Mr. Trump has repeatedly claimed the U.S. needs Greenland for national security purposes.

    “It’s so strategic right now,” he told reporters on Sunday, Jan. 4. “Greenland is covered with Russian and Chinese ships all over the place … We need Greenland from the standpoint of national security, and Denmark is not going to be able to do it.”

    “The Americans have a strong interest in overseeing the activities of foreign countries in Greenland because it’s such a big security asset for foreign states, and due to that, any investment or activity, from the American point of view, may be seen as a security threat,” Frank Sejersen, associate professor at the University of Copenhagen, told CBS News earlier this year.

    Control over a new, valuable route for shipping

    Melting sea ice around Greenland has created more opportunity to use the Northern Sea route — allowing shippers to save millions of dollars in fuel by taking a shorter route between Europe and Asia that was long only passable in warmer months.

    A Russian commercial vessel, aided by an icebreaker, first traversed the route in the winter in February 2021.

    northern-sea-route-suez-canal-route.png

    An illustration by the European University at St. Petersburg shows the Northern Sea shipping route, which a Russian tanker traversed for the first time ever in the winter in February 2021, and the southern Suez Canal route.

    European University at St. Petersburg


    Greenland’s underground resources

    Greenland has reserves of oil, natural gas and highly sought after mineral resources.

    Those mineral resources, which include rare earth elements, “have only been lightly explored and developed,” Jose W. Fernandez, the U.S. Department of State’s undersecretary for economic growth, energy and the environment, said at a Minerals Security Partnership event in Greenland in November 2024.

    Greenland may have significant reserves of up to 31 different minerals, including lithium and graphite, according to a 2023 report assessing the island’s resources. Both minerals are needed to produce batteries for electric vehicles and a wide array of other technologies.

    Currently, lithium production is dominated by Australia, Chile and China, while China produces about 65% of the world’s graphite, the report noted.

    Greenland also has the potential to provide a significant amount of rare earth minerals such as Neodymium, which is used to make the magnets used in electric motors, the 2023 report said. 

    China produces about 70% of rare earth elements, and demand for rare earth minerals continues to grow with technological advances and the rapid spread of consumer devices that require the resources.

    There are, however, significant hurdles to mining in Greenland, including environmental and cost issues.

    Most Greenlanders don’t want to be American

    Greenland’s Prime Minister Jens-Frederik Nielsen said Tuesday that his country wants good relations with the U.S. and did not “think that there might be a takeover of the country overnight, and that is why we are insisting that we want good cooperation.”

    A poll conducted a year ago showed that 85% of Greenlanders did not want to be part of the United States.

    “He can’t just take it like that,” Daniel Rosing, a trainee electrician who said he was proud of being a Greenlander, told CBS News ahead of a visit last year to the island by Vice President JD Vance and his wife.

    Vice President JD Vance Visits US Military Base In Northern Greenland

    Vice President JD Vance and second lady Usha Vance tour the U.S. military’s Pituffik Space Base in Greenland, March 28, 2025, with Col. Susannah Meyers, seen on the left.

    Jim Watson/Pool/Getty


    A brief history of Greenland 

    The Kingdom of Denmark began colonizing Greenland in the early 18th century, hundreds of years after Vikings from the same distant land first arrived to set up residency. 

    It was not until World War II that the U.S. established a presence on the island, when then-Danish Ambassador to the U.S., Henrik Kauffmann, refused to surrender to the rule of Denmark’s Nazi occupiers.

    Denmark was liberated from Nazi occupation in 1945, and the European nation carried on as a colonial ruler of Greenland until 1953, when it fully laid out its relations with the island as a semi-autonomous territory.

    The U.S. never left the Pituffik Space Base, which was established during WWII.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • U.S. NATO allies say

    [ad_1]


    European leaders released a joint statement Tuesday, outlining the importance of Arctic security, but stressing that “Greenland belongs to its people,” hours after White House deputy chief of staff for policy Stephen Miller said it was “the formal position of the U.S. government that Greenland should be part of the U.S.”

    Miller also said, in an interview Monday with CNN, that the United States, “is the power of NATO. For the U.S. to secure the Arctic region, to protect and defend NATO and NATO interests, obviously Greenland should be part of the U.S.”

    “NATO has made clear that the Arctic region is a priority and European Allies are stepping up. We and many other Allies have increased our presence, activities and investments, to keep the Arctic safe and to deter adversaries,” the leaders of France, Germany, Italy, Poland, Spain, the U.K. and Greenland said in their joint statement on Tuesday.

    “Security in the Arctic must therefore be achieved collectively, in conjunction with NATO allies including the United States, by upholding the principles of the U.N. Charter, including sovereignty, territorial integrity and the inviolability of borders. These are universal principles, and we will not stop defending them. The United States is an essential partner in this endeavor, as a NATO ally and through the defense agreement between the Kingdom of Denmark and the United States of 1951,” the U.S. allies said.

    “Greenland belongs to its people. It is for Denmark and Greenland, and them only, to decide on matters concerning Denmark and Greenland.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Only Greenland and Denmark Can Decide on Their Future, European Leaders Say in Joint Statement

    [ad_1]

    COPENHAGEN, ‌Jan ​6 (Reuters) – Greenland ‌belongs to ​its ‍people, ​and ​only Denmark ⁠and Greenland can decide ‌on matters concerning ​their ‌relations, ‍the leaders of ⁠France, Germany, Italy, ​Poland, Spain, Britain, and Denmark said in a joint statement on Tuesday.

    (Reporting ​by Jacob Gronholt-Pedersen, editing ​by Terje Solsvik)

    Copyright 2026 Thomson Reuters.

    Photos You Should See – December 2025

    [ad_2]

    Reuters

    Source link

  • Trump’s threats of intervention jolt allies and foes alike

    [ad_1]

    Venezuela risks “a second strike” if its interim government doesn’t acquiesce to U.S. demands. Cuba is “ready to fall,” and Colombia is “very sick, too.”

    Iran may get “hit very hard” if its government cracks down on protesters. And Denmark risks U.S. intervention, as well, because “we need Greenland,” President Trump said.

    In just 37 minutes while speaking with reporters Sunday aboard Air Force One, Trump threatened to attack five countries, both allies and adversaries, with the might of the U.S. military — an extraordinary turn for a president who built his political career rejecting traditional conservative views on the exercise of American power and vowing to put America first.

    The president’s threats come as a third of the U.S. naval fleet remains stationed in the Caribbean, after Trump launched a daring attack on Venezuela that seized its president, Nicolás Maduro, and his wife over the weekend.

    The goal, U.S. officials said, was to show the Venezuelan government and the wider world what the American military is capable of — and to compel partners and foes alike to adhere to Trump’s demands through intimidation, rather than commit the U.S. military to more complex, conventional, long-term engagements.

    It is the deployment of overwhelming and spectacular force in surgical military operations — Maduro’s capture, last year’s strikes against Iranian nuclear facilities, assassinations of Islamic State leadership and Iran’s top general in Iraq — that demonstrate Trump as a brazen leader willing to risk war, thereby effectively avoiding it, one Trump administration official said, explaining the president’s strategic thinking.

    Yet experts and former Trump aides warn the president’s approach risks miscalculation, alienating vital allies and emboldening U.S. competitors.

    At a Security Council meeting Monday at the United Nations in New York — called by Colombia, a long-standing and major non-North Atlantic Treaty Oranization ally to the United States — Trump’s moves were widely condemned. “Violations of the U.N. Charter,” a French diplomat told the council, “chips away at the very foundation of international order.”

    Even the envoy from Russia, which has cultivated historically strong ties with the Trump administration, said the White House operation was an act of “banditry,” marking “a return to the era of illegality and American dominance through force, chaos and lawlessness.”

    Trump’s threats to annex Greenland, an autonomous territory of the Kingdom of Denmark with vast natural resources, drew particular concern across Europe on Monday, with leaders across the continent warning the United States against an attack that would violate the sovereignty of a NATO ally and European Union member state.

    “That’s enough now,” Greenland’s prime minister, Jens-Frederik Nielsen, said after Trump told reporters that his attention would turn to the world’s largest island in a matter of weeks.

    “If the United States decides to militarily attack another NATO country, then everything would stop,” Denmark’s prime minister, Mette Frederiksen, told local press. “That includes NATO, and therefore, post-World War II security.”

    Trump also threatened to strike Iran, where anti-government protests have spread throughout the country in recent days. Trump had previously said the U.S. military was “locked and loaded” if Iranian security forces begin firing on protesters, “which is their custom.”

    “The United States of America will come to their rescue,” Trump wrote on social media on Jan. 2, hours before launching the Venezuela mission. “We are locked and loaded and ready to go. Thank you for your attention to this matter!”

    In Colombia, there was widespread outrage after Trump threatened military action against leftist President Gustavo Petro, whom Trump accused, without evidence, of running “cocaine mills and cocaine factories.”

    Petro is a frequent critic of the American president and has slammed as illegal a series of lethal U.S. airstrikes against alleged drug boats in the Caribbean and the eastern Pacific.

    “Stop slandering me,” Petro wrote on X, warning that any U.S. attempts against his presidency “will unleash the people’s fury.”

    Petro, a former leftist guerrilla, said he would go to war to defend Colombia.

    “I swore not to touch a weapon again,” he said. “But for the homeland, I will take up arms.”

    Trump’s threats have strained relations with Colombia, a devoted U.S. ally. For decades, the countries have shared military intelligence, a robust trade relationship and a multibillion-dollar fight against drug trafficking.

    Even some of Petro’s domestic critics have comes to his defense. Presidential candidate Juan Manuel Galán, who opposes Petro’s rule, said Colombia’s sovereignty “must be defended.”

    “Colombia is not Venezuela,” Galán wrote on X. “It is not a failed state, and we will not allow it to be treated as such. Here we have institutions, democracy and sovereignty that must be defended.”

    The president of Mexico, another longtime U.S. ally and its largest trading partner, has also spoken out forcefully against the American operation in Caracas, and said the Trump administration’s aggressive foreign policy in Latin America threatens the stability of the region.

    “We categorically reject intervention in the internal affairs of other countries,” President Claudia Sheinbaum said in her daily news conference Monday. “The history of Latin America is clear and compelling: Intervention has never brought democracy, has never generated well-being or lasting stability.”

    She addressed Trump’s comments over the weekend that drugs were “pouring” through Mexico, and that the United States was “going to have to do something.”

    Trump has been threatening action against cartels for months, with some members of his administration suggesting that the United States may soon carry out drone strikes on drug laboratories and other targets inside Mexican territory. Sheinbaum has repeatedly said such strikes would be a clear violation of Mexican sovereignty.

    “Sovereignty and the self-determination of peoples are non-negotiable,” she said. “They are fundamental principles of international law and must always be respected without exception.”

    Cuba also rejected Trump’s threat of a military intervention there, after Trump’s secretary of State, Marco Rubio, himself the descendant of Cuban immigrants, suggested that Havana may be next in Washington’s crosshairs.

    “We call on the international community to stop this dangerous, aggressive escalation and to preserve peace,” Cuban President Miguel Díaz-Canel posted on social media.

    The U.S. attacks on Venezuela, and Trump’s threats of additional military ventures, have caused deep unease in a relatively peaceful region that has seen fewer interstate wars in recent decades than Europe, Asia or Africa.

    It also caused unease among some Trump supporters, who remembered his pledge to get the United States out of “endless” military conflicts for good.

    “I was the first president in modern times,” Trump said, accepting the Republican presidential nomination in 2024, “to start no new wars.”

    Wilner reported from Washington and Linthicum from Mexico City.

    [ad_2]

    Michael Wilner, Kate Linthicum

    Source link

  • Trump administration slashes number of diseases U.S. children will be regularly vaccinated against

    [ad_1]

    The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services announced sweeping changes to the pediatric vaccine schedule on Monday, sharply cutting the number of diseases U.S. children will be regularly immunized against.

    Under the new guidelines, the U.S. still recommends that all children be vaccinated against measles, mumps, rubella, polio, pertussis, tetanus, diphtheria, Haemophilus influenzae type B (Hib), pneumococcal disease, human papillomavirus (HPV) and varicella, better known as chickenpox.

    Vaccines for all other diseases will now fall into one of two categories: recommended only for specific high-risk groups, or available through “shared clinical decision-making” — the administration’s preferred term for “optional.”

    These include immunizations for hepatitis A and B, rotavirus, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV), bacterial meningitis, influenza and COVID-19. All these shots were previously recommended for all children.

    Insurance companies will still be required to fully cover all childhood vaccines on the CDC schedule, including those now designated as optional, according to the Department of Health and Human Services.

    Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., a longtime vaccine critic, said in a statement that the new schedule “protects children, respects families, and rebuilds trust in public health.”

    But pediatricians and public health officials widely condemned the shift, saying that it would lead to more uncertainty for patients and a resurgence of diseases that had been under control.

    “The decision to weaken the childhood immunization schedule is misguided and dangerous,” said Dr. René Bravo, a pediatrician and president of the California Medical Assn. “Today’s decision undermines decades of evidence-based public health policy and sends a deeply confusing message to families at a time when vaccine confidence is already under strain.”

    The American Academy of Pediatrics condemned the changes as “dangerous and unnecessary,” and said that it will continue to publish its own schedule of recommended immunizations. In September, California, Oregon, Washington and Hawaii announced that those four states would follow an independent immunization schedule based on recommendations from the AAP and other medical groups.

    The federal changes have been anticipated since December, when President Trump signed a presidential memorandum directing the health department to update the pediatric vaccine schedule “to align with such scientific evidence and best practices from peer, developed countries.”

    The new U.S. vaccination guidelines are much closer to those of Denmark, which routinely vaccinates its children against only 10 diseases.

    As doctors and public health experts have pointed out, Denmark also has a robust system of government-funded universal healthcare, a smaller and more homogenous population, and a different disease burden.

    “The vaccines that are recommended in any particular country reflect the diseases that are prevalent in that country,” said Dr. Kelly Gebo, dean of the Milken Institute School of Public Health at George Washington University. “Just because one country has a vaccine schedule that is perfectly reasonable for that country, it may not be at all reasonable” elsewhere.

    Almost every pregnant woman in Denmark is screened for hepatitis B, for example. In the U.S., less than 85% of pregnant women are screened for the disease.

    Instead, the U.S. has relied on universal vaccination to protect children whose mothers don’t receive adequate care during pregnancy. Hepatitis B has been nearly eliminated in the U.S. since the vaccine was introduced in 1991. Last month, a panel of Kennedy appointees voted to drop the CDC’s decades-old recommendation that all newborns be vaccinated against the disease at birth.

    “Viruses and bacteria that were under control are being set free on our most vulnerable,” said Dr. James Alwine, a virologist and member of the nonprofit advocacy group Defend Public Health. “It may take one or two years for the tragic consequences to become clear, but this is like asking farmers in North Dakota to grow pineapples. It won’t work and can’t end well.”

    [ad_2]

    Corinne Purtill

    Source link

  • German Minister: Protection of Greenland Will Be Discussed Within NATO if Needed

    [ad_1]

    LONDON, Jan 5 (Reuters) – German Foreign ‌Minister ​Johann Wadephul said ‌on Monday that Greenland belonged to Denmark ​and that the NATO alliance could discuss strengthening its ‍protection if necessary.

    Wadephul was ​speaking after U.S. President Donald Trump made ​renewed threats ⁠to take over Greenland, a prospect that alarmed NATO allies and has taken on a new urgency after Trump followed through on threats to topple Venezuelan leader ‌Nicolas Maduro.

    Trump has repeatedly said he wants to ​take over ‌Greenland, an ambition first ‍voiced ⁠in 2019 during his first presidency.

    On Sunday, he told The Atlantic magazine in an interview: “We do need Greenland, absolutely. We need it for defence.”

    Speaking to reporters in Lithuania, Wadephul said Germany had questions about Maduro’s removal ​and stressed the Venezuelan people should determine their country’s future in free and fair elections, after Trump said the U.S. would run the country.

    On Greenland, Wadephul stressed it was part of Denmark.

    “And since Denmark is a member of NATO, Greenland will, in principle, also be subject to NATO defence,” he said.

    “And if there are further requirements ​to strengthen defence efforts concerning Greenland, then we will have to discuss this within the framework of the alliance.”

    He did not elaborate on the ​nature of those discussions.

    (Reporting by Matthias Williams, editing by Miranda Murray)

    Copyright 2026 Thomson Reuters.

    Photos You Should See – December 2025

    [ad_2]

    Reuters

    Source link