After the Attack on Venezuela, Trump Returns to Greenland: Insists on Annexation as Denmark Responds

Original article: Tras el ataque a Venezuela, Trump vuelve por Groenlandia: insiste en anexión y Dinamarca lo encara

In the wake of the attack on Venezuela, Donald Trump has reignited another geopolitical concern: Greenland. This Sunday, the U.S. President reiterated his ‘need’ for the island citing ‘national security’ reasons, just hours after Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen demanded that Washington halt its threats regarding possible annexation.

Speaking from Air Force One, Trump did not hold back: he characterized Greenland as a “highly strategic” point, noting the presence of Russian and Chinese vessels. In his reasoning, this strategic landscape justifies U.S. actions, even against the wishes of a historic ally.

Greenland Annexation: The ‘National Security’ Argument

The narrative is familiar: when Washington seeks to pursue an objective, it often packages it in indefensible terms. This time, the key phrase is “national security.” Trump also criticized Denmark for its management of the island—an autonomous territory but still part of the Danish kingdom—and even quipped that to “enhance security,” they might have included “a dog sled.”

When asked about his justification for annexation, the President reiterated: “national security.” He added a remark that pointed directly at the European board: “The European Union needs us to have it, and they know it.”

Denmark’s Direct Response

From the Danish side, the reply was straightforward. Frederiksen urged the United States to “urgently” stop its threats against “a historically close ally” and emphasized that Greenland and its people have made it “very clear that they are not for sale.” Additionally, she questioned the rationale behind such pressure, given that Denmark—and by extension Greenland—is part of NATO.

For his part, Trump dismissed the idea that any potential annexation would harm his “very good relationship” with Xi Jinping, although he hinted at another leverage point: “We have the power of tariffs.”