Europe
Europe prepares deterrence strategy against potential US move on Greenland
European nations are drafting a “deterrence plan” to counter the possibility of a US move against Greenland, according to a report by Politico citing officials, diplomats, and NATO sources.
Speaking to the magazine, one European diplomat emphasized the need for readiness. “We must be prepared for a direct confrontation with Trump. He is acting in an aggressive mode, and we need to be ready for that,” the diplomat stated.
An anonymous German official told Politico that Johann Wadephul, a senior member of the German parliament, and his colleagues are working on deterrent measures Europe could implement in the event of a potential US invasion. Additionally, the possibility of increasing NATO’s presence in the immediate vicinity of the island is being examined.
Europe’s three options on the table: Conciliation, financing, and economic warfare
Based on statements from the officials interviewed, Politico categorized Europe’s potential responses into three main pillars. The first option focuses on conciliation.
A former high-ranking NATO official suggested that the alliance could act as a mediator between Denmark, Greenland, and the US. “Everything possible must be done to increase the alliance’s presence near Greenland and to meet Trump’s demands,” the diplomat said.
The second option involves Europe significantly increasing its financial support to Greenland.
Following Trump’s promises of massive investment should the island join the US, the European Union and Denmark are attempting to convince Greenland that they can offer a “more profitable alternative.” Brussels plans to more than double the funding provided to Greenland starting in 2028, though this spending increase has not yet been formally approved within the EU.
“Planning a security strategy to protect against America is madness”
The third option involves a direct economic response to the US. Thomas Crosby, an expert on the US armed forces at the Royal Danish Defence College, recalled that the EU had previously drafted plans to ensure European and Arctic security without the US during Trump’s first term.
“It is difficult, but possible. However, I don’t think anyone is seriously considering how to ensure Europe’s security against America. This is literal madness,” Crosby remarked.
One of the primary tools available is the “Anti-Coercion Instrument,” often referred to as an “economic bazooka.” This mechanism includes measures such as tariffs, taxes on American companies, and bans on investment in the European economy.
However, should the US decide to take control of Greenland by force, the chances of Europeans preventing it are seen as extremely low. Crosby suggested that if the Americans were to send a small military group, an attempt could be made to arrest them. A European diplomat added that France and Germany could potentially deploy troops to deter an invasion if requested by Denmark.
White House: Use of military force is always at the Commander-in-Chief’s disposal
Donald Trump has not ruled out the possibility of using military force to establish control over Greenland. The US President has stated that his country “desperately needs” the territory within the context of international security.
While Jeff Landry, Trump’s Special Envoy for Greenland, stated that the US goal is “not to conquer anyone” but rather to offer “economic power and protection,” statements from the White House suggest a different tone.
According to a report by The Wall Street Journal (WSJ), US Secretary of State Marco Rubio informed congressional leaders that Trump is intent on purchasing Greenland and is using bellicose rhetoric to pressure Denmark into negotiations. Rubio reportedly made these comments during a briefing regarding an operation to capture Venezuelan leader Nicolas Maduro, after Senate Democratic Minority Leader Chuck Schumer asked whether military force would be used elsewhere, including Mexico and Greenland.
The White House has not publicly rejected the military option. White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt stated, “President Trump has made it clear that the acquisition of Greenland is a US national security priority and is vital for deterring our adversaries in the Arctic region. The President and his team are discussing a range of options to achieve this important foreign policy goal, and of course, the use of the US armed forces is always at the discretion of the Commander-in-Chief.”
The Micronesia model?
Furthermore, a senior US official speaking to Reuters said that Trump and his advisors are discussing various methods to acquire Greenland, including a direct purchase or a “Free Association” agreement.
Such agreements, which the US maintains with Micronesia, the Marshall Islands, and Palau, stipulate that these territories are not part of the US, but Washington provides them with protection and free trade. In exchange, the US military is permitted to operate on these lands without restriction.
“Diplomacy and deal-making are always the first option for the President. He loves deals. Therefore, if there is an opportunity to make a profitable deal to acquire Greenland, he will instinctively prefer that option,” the official said.
Thomas Crosby of the Royal Danish Defence College emphasized that such a deal would not necessarily benefit Greenland. “Trump’s fundamental approach is to impose his will on the people he negotiates with. In both his private and public life, he has repeatedly betrayed those he made deals with, failed to fulfill his obligations, and exploited those around him,” Crosby evaluated.
According to Crosby, it would be “madness” for Greenlanders to accept anything in the hope of a fair deal. The expert noted that the worst-case scenario, should Trump decide to use force, would be a “fait accompli strategy” similar to Putin’s attempt to seize Ukraine. In this scenario, Trump could simply send troops and declare that Greenland now belongs to the US.
“It would take half an hour for the capital Nuuk to fall”
Lin Mortensgaard, an expert on Greenlandic security at the Danish Institute for International Studies, stated that whether the US uses only the troops already stationed at its military base on the island or deploys special forces, it could seize control of the capital, Nuuk, in “half an hour or less.”
Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen emphasized earlier this week that such an event would signal the end of the current global order. “The international community as we know it, the democratic rules of the game, and NATO, the world’s most powerful defense alliance… if one NATO country decides to attack another, all of this collapses,” Frederiksen stated.
Europe
Fico accuses Merz of blackmail over threat to veto EU budget
Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico has hit back after German Chancellor Friedrich Merz threatened to veto the EU budget unless funding for Ukraine is secured.
Merz said he would block the EU’s seven-year budget if no agreement is reached on financial assistance for Ukraine.
The chancellor’s intervention has angered Central European leaders who are net beneficiaries of EU funds but do not want to take part in the next round of funding to support Ukraine’s war effort.
“What the chancellor is doing is typical blackmail, and I will not bow to it,” Fico told reporters in Bratislava.
Fico spoke alongside his Czech counterpart, Andrej Babiš, whose government has refused to participate in a future loan to Ukraine.
“I do not know why he said this,” Babiš said, referring to Merz’s stance.
Merz wants EU leaders to discuss Ukraine’s financing needs at a summit in Dublin on Friday.
In a letter to European Council President António Costa, who will chair the meeting, obtained by The Guardian, Merz wrote:
“We must maintain our support for Ukraine in its struggle to defend itself. This is our shared vital interest. Yet bilateral aid provided to Ukraine is distributed unevenly, with the burden shouldered mostly by only a few member states.”
The EU agreed last year to provide a €90 billion loan to Ukraine, intended to cover two-thirds of its military and civilian spending for 2026 and 2027.
Since then, however, Russia’s relentless bombardment has placed a heavier financial burden on Kyiv, prompting President Volodymyr Zelenskyy to ask for €70 billion to plug the budget deficit.
The EU has endorsed Zelenskyy’s figures and pledged to find €45 billion. Ukraine’s other allies, such as Britain and Canada, are expected to cover the rest.
Last year, Merz launched an initiative to tap €210 billion in frozen Russian state assets held in the EU, but the plan fell through due to opposition led by Belgium, which holds most of the funds in Brussels.
The €90 billion loan was the backup plan. Having opted out of that loan, Hungary, Slovakia, and Czechia indicated that they would not take part in the next round either.
Bulgaria joined these three member states following the election of Prime Minister Rumen Radev last April.
The question of funding for Ukraine is now spilling over into the fraught negotiations on the 2028-34 EU budget.
Germany, the largest net contributor, wants substantial cuts to the proposed budget and opposes the EU providing generous funding to member states that refuse to contribute to Ukraine’s financial needs.
Merz states in his letter that a “collective commitment without exceptions” is a “fundamental prerequisite” for closing Ukraine’s financing gap and for “discussing other matters, particularly those with financial implications.”
He also notes that, in the context of the EU’s next seven-year budget, known as the Multiannual Financial Framework, all member states must contribute to a “robust” financial perspective for Ukraine from 2028 onwards.
A German government official said:
“For the Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) to be successfully concluded, it is vital that all EU member states provide financial support to Ukraine.”
Berlin is also aiming to shift decision-making on funding for Ukraine from unanimity to qualified majority voting, in an effort to prevent a single government from blocking EU decisions.
The letter reflects mounting frustration among the EU’s northern member states, Ukraine’s most generous backers, over lower contributions from other EU countries in Central and Southern Europe.
The task of brokering an agreement on the budget falls to Costa, the former Portuguese prime minister.
Costa wants a deal by the end of the year, ahead of elections in France, Poland, and Italy in 2027 that could complicate the process.
A spokesperson for Costa confirmed receipt of the letter without elaborating on details. “President Costa will dedicate time to the Ukraine issue at the informal European Council meeting in Dublin this week,” the spokesperson said, adding that funding for Ukraine would be addressed at a dedicated summit on the EU budget scheduled for 26-27 November.
Europe
EU expects next Israeli government to adopt less aggressive posture
The EU expects the next Israeli government to mend its “difficult relationship” with Brussels and adopt a more constructive approach toward Gaza and illegal settlements.
Israeli President Isaac Herzog tasked Gadi Eisenkot, the leader of the anti-Netanyahu bloc, on Sunday with forming a government.
Eisenkot stated that the country faces a “catastrophic diplomatic crisis” as traditional allies begin to reassess their relations with Israel.
Speaking to Rapporteur, several European diplomats stationed in Tel Aviv said they expect ties to get back on track.
“Whatever government comes in, we can try to revitalize relations because Israel is clearly a very important partner,” one European diplomat said, adding that Brussels expects the next administration to be “less aggressive”.
The diplomat noted that relations with Europe are currently “not very good”.
Israel cut off communication with Kaja Kallas, the EU high representative for foreign affairs and security policy, after Rapporteur revealed in June that she had compared Israel to apartheid-era South Africa during a visit to Mexico.
The diplomat stated that this decision, taken ahead of elections, was political in nature. A second European diplomat based in Brussels explained that the announcement came only a few days before an official visit by Dubravka Šuica, the European commissioner for the Mediterranean.
“This could have been interpreted as a tactic to divide Europe, but Israel had asked Kallas to deny the report; she did not do so,” the second diplomat said.
Brussels has repeatedly voiced its frustration with Israel over the humanitarian crisis in Gaza and the expansion of West Bank settlements.
However, EU governments blocked almost all sanctions proposed by the European Commission.
A third diplomat said opposition parties would “almost certainly take the issue more seriously” when it comes to tackling violence by West Bank settlers:
“We see Palestinians being expelled from their homes and new illegal settlements being built in the West Bank. There is a reluctance on the part of the current government to address this issue, which causes problems in our relations.”
The new government is expected to ease pressure on Palestinians and halt construction of the E1 settlement project, a controversial plan to build settler housing in the West Bank east of Jerusalem.
“They will probably try to deal with the problem of extremist settlers in the West Bank,” the diplomat added.
On Gaza, the diplomat described the situation as “a complete nightmare”, with two million Palestinians crowded into an area that accounts for roughly 35% of the territory.
“There are not enough tents for the winter, and not enough vaccines are reaching the area despite an increase in diseases,” the diplomat said.
The European official argued that Donald Trump’s peace plan met all the conditions for Europe. Although the EU had much to offer, neither the US nor Israel appeared interested in EU involvement in the process.
“We are currently training Palestinian police in the West Bank, and if permitted, we could do the same in Gaza,” the diplomat said.
The diplomat disclosed that Israel had agreed with Šuica that Europe would finance two projects aimed at improving sewage and water infrastructure in Gaza, continuing:
“However, none of these projects has started yet because there is a serious problem with dual-use goods. Getting materials into Gaza is very difficult because the Israelis say they could be misused if they fall into the wrong hands of Hamas.”
Israel insists that Hamas must be disarmed before subsequent phases of Trump’s plan can proceed.
With disarmament unlikely to happen in the near term, the EU argues that certain measures can be carried out in parallel.
“We can begin rebuilding sanitation systems in Gaza. We can start building desalination plants. We can begin providing energy and water to Gaza,” one diplomat said.
While Brussels hopes for progress on Gaza and the West Bank, it maintains that expectations regarding the establishment of a Palestinian state need to be “managed”.
The EU continues to advocate a two-state solution, yet most leading Jewish parties oppose the creation of a Palestinian state.
The diplomat noted that the next Israeli government will likely have “a very slim majority and not much room for manoeuvre”.
There is also a “major misunderstanding” between the EU and Israel that must be addressed. According to the diplomat, Europeans fail to recognize the “psychological impact” of 7 October on Israelis.
“This event changed the country and made the two-state solution even more distant than before,” the diplomat said.
In return, some Israeli politicians believe Europe has betrayed Israel despite what they view as a fight against “Islamist terrorism”.
“Their argument is that European politicians are somewhat afraid of the Muslim population in Europe,” the European diplomat said.
Europe strongly opposes Iran and the possibility of Tehran acquiring nuclear weapons, imposing sanctions in response.
However, the diplomat argued that the EU would not participate in a war because it lacks a common army:
“We are a diplomatic and economic power, which is why we resort to sanctions and diplomacy. The expectation that we would take part in a military operation is unrealistic.”
Europe
Germany threatens EU budget veto over long-term Ukraine aid
Germany has threatened to veto the European Union’s joint budget for the 2028-2034 period, which is currently under negotiation, unless every member state commits to providing financial support to Ukraine in 2027 and subsequent years, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz warned.
According to a report by the Financial Times (FT), Chancellor Merz set out Berlin’s condition for the budget talks in a letter addressed to European Council President António Costa.
In his letter, Merz wrote: “A collective commitment that every single one of us, without exception, will make a fair contribution to closing Ukraine’s budget deficit is an indispensable prerequisite for resolving this budget issue and, in particular, for addressing subsequent matters that carry financial implications.”
The German Chancellor stressed that a formula backed by all member states must be established to provide Ukraine with a reliable, multi-year financial perspective starting from 2028.
Merz also insisted that any agreed solution must cover the interest payments on debts incurred to finance the assistance provided to Kyiv.
Conversely, several countries within the bloc have cut financial aid to Ukraine, and the number of capitals adopting this stance is projected to rise next year.
In December 2025, Hungary, Slovakia, and the Czech Republic approved the EU’s 90 billion euro loan package for Kyiv only on the condition that they would not contribute to its costs themselves.
Alongside these three countries, Bulgaria has also stated that it does not plan to participate in subsequent financial assistance packages for Ukraine.
In France, far-right leader Marine Le Pen, who could potentially win the presidential election scheduled for spring 2027, recently told the FT that Paris has run out of funds.
Le Pen assessed: “The honest approach is to tell Mr Zelensky clearly, and even warn him: ‘Look, we cannot do more. We have already allocated the 90 billion euro EU loan, in which France’s share amounts to 18 billion euros. 18 billion euros is genuinely a huge amount of money.'”
The EU’s 90 billion euro loan, covering the 2026-2027 period, aims to meet two-thirds of Ukraine’s financing requirements.
Brussels expects the remaining 45 billion euros to be covered by other partners, including Canada, the UK, Norway, Japan, South Korea, and Australia.
Germany remains the largest net contributor to the EU budget.
In contrast, the four Eastern European countries seeking to avoid financing Ukraine rank among the largest net beneficiaries of the bloc’s budget.
Leveraging this balance, Chancellor Merz aims to use his influence in the EU budget negotiations to secure uninterrupted support for Kyiv in 2027 and the years beyond.
According to the FT, Berlin is also demanding that future aid packages be decided by qualified majority voting rather than unanimity, which is required under the current system.
A German government spokesperson told the newspaper:
“The issue of Ukraine’s financial needs must be resolved within the framework of the next EU budget. Financial support for Ukraine from all EU members is decisive for the successful conclusion of the budget talks.”
-
Diplomacy1 week agoSecular dress code dispute exposes deeper Türkiye-Azerbaijan strains
-
Russia2 weeks agoUS and Russia weigh energy deals and corporate return in peace talks
-
Europe6 days agoEU urges citizens to prepare 72-hour survival kits for crises
-
Middle East2 weeks agoUS warns Gulf allies of possible Iran strikes after midterms
-
America2 weeks agoBolsonaro reportedly leaves Brazil on jet linked to scandal-hit firm
-
Asia1 week agoChina expands Africa arms sales, displacing France and Western rivals
-
Europe2 weeks agoEU prepares Ukraine peace mission to Abu Dhabi led by Björn Seibert
-
Diplomacy2 weeks agoSteinmeier seeks to de-escalate German-Chinese tensions on visit
