January 21, 2026 — 6:59am
London: A simmering tension is palpable across Europe in response to former U.S. President Donald Trump’s controversial demand for Greenland. This demand has not only hardened opinions but has also sparked a debate on how Europe should respond to such geopolitical maneuvers.
For many Europeans, memories are still fresh of their military support to the United States in Afghanistan and Iraq following the September 11 attacks. More than 850 European soldiers lost their lives in Afghanistan alone, participating in NATO-backed operations against terrorism. Now, under Trump’s leadership, the U.S. is threatening its allies with economic sanctions in a bold attempt to acquire Greenland, a territory of Denmark, a longstanding American ally.
European Leaders React to U.S. Pressure
Anders Fogh Rasmussen, former Prime Minister of Denmark and ex-Secretary-General of NATO, expressed his dismay at the U.S. threats, especially after Denmark’s sacrifices in Iraq and Afghanistan. “We must draw an impassable line in the snow of Greenland,” he wrote in The Economist, underscoring the need for a firm stance against such aggressive tactics.
European leaders are attempting to maintain a composed exterior. British Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer has emphasized the importance of avoiding a trade war, despite Trump’s threat of imposing tariffs starting at 10% next month, escalating to 25% by June. Meanwhile, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen is adopting a firm but non-provocative approach.
However, French President Emmanuel Macron is advocating for more decisive action, urging the European Union to deploy a “trade bazooka” to impose comprehensive trade and investment sanctions on the U.S. Rasmussen supports this strategy, stating, “Mr. Trump may think he holds all the cards, but Europe could inflict the biggest trade blow ever dealt to the American economy.”
Lessons from China: A New Approach?
This situation has led some to suggest that Europe could take cues from China’s handling of trade disputes with the U.S. Unlike Europe, China has treated the U.S. as a competitor, responding with strategic retaliations rather than conciliatory gestures. For instance, China imposed tariffs on American soybeans, impacting U.S. farmers, and threatened to restrict access to critical minerals essential to the U.S. tech industry.
While no one advocates for a trade war, the softer European approach to Trump has proven ineffective. The U.S. president perceives strength and weakness in his adversaries, and the European rush to placate him on tariffs has only emboldened his aggressive tactics.
The Davos Test: A Crucial Meeting
The upcoming World Economic Forum in Davos presents a critical opportunity for European leaders to confront Trump directly. German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, von der Leyen, and other leaders are expected to meet with Trump, potentially setting the stage for a pivotal diplomatic encounter.
Trump, before departing for Davos, hinted at a possible compromise, suggesting that both sides could “work something out.” However, European leaders are aware that they cannot rely solely on his assurances and must prepare to assert their position more forcefully.
Challenges and Opportunities for Europe
Despite its economic strength, Europe faces challenges in matching China’s strategic leverage. The EU’s economy, while significant, is smaller than the U.S. and heavily reliant on American defense support. Moreover, Europe’s democratic structure, with its diverse voices, contrasts sharply with China’s centralized decision-making.
According to the International Monetary Fund, the EU accounts for 14% of the global economy by purchasing power parity, compared to the U.S. at 15% and China at 20%.
Macron’s proposed “bazooka” strategy extends beyond tariffs, encompassing intellectual property rights, financial market access, and limits on foreign investment—key areas for U.S. multinational companies. The EU’s significant purchase of U.S. soybeans, valued at $3.6 billion annually, adds another dimension to the potential economic standoff.
Unity within Europe remains a challenge. The UK, with distinct defense priorities, may diverge from EU strategies, and internal political pressures are mounting as major European leaders face declining popularity. Despite criticism, particularly in the UK, where Prime Minister Starmer’s political acumen is under scrutiny, the broader issue remains Trump’s unpredictable diplomacy.
Implications for Transatlantic Relations
Trump’s abrupt and chaotic approach to foreign policy is reshaping the transatlantic alliance, just a year after assurances of its strength. With NATO members facing a war on their eastern borders, the stakes are high, and European leaders view Trump’s actions as a betrayal of historical alliances.
Rasmussen’s call for a robust response reflects the widespread anger across Europe. “Mr. Trump, like Vladimir Putin and Xi Jinping, believes in power and power only,” he writes. “Europe must prepare to play by those same rules.”
The unfolding situation underscores the need for Europe to recalibrate its diplomatic strategies, balancing assertiveness with the realities of its geopolitical position. As the Davos meeting approaches, the world watches to see if Europe will rise to the challenge or succumb to the pressures of a rapidly changing global landscape.
