
Since Donald Trump made his entrance to the White House in January, Danish-American relations have undergone an extremely marked change. The Trump administration’s aggressive statements and threats against Greenland and Denmark that violate international law are without precedent.
To begin with, the government kept a low profile, was dragging its feet and extremely meek. Others had to take the lead in formulating a Danish-Greenlandic response to President Trump’s threats against Greenland.
Broad Opposition in Society
The opposition has found expression from popular boycotts of American goods via support demonstrations for Greenland to demands for the closure of the American consulate in Nuuk – as well as a pronounced popular opposition to the Danish-American base agreements.
This has particularly been reflected in several opinion polls with consistent opposition to the base agreements. This was clearly expressed in Jyllands-Posten’s opinion poll on Friday 28 March, where two-thirds of those who had taken a position declared themselves against the Danish-American base agreement, whilst supporters could only muster one-third.
The entirely reasonable criticism of the USA and Trump’s foreign policy has further found broad fertile ground. Even influential bourgeois luminaries such as Søren Pind, Bertel Haarder and Jarl Cordua have renounced their hitherto boundless enthusiasm for and unconditional support of the USA.
Only during the visit to Greenland did Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen become a bit clearer in her stance. Based on international law, she pedagogically instructed the Americans: “National borders, state sovereignty, territorial integrity. This is rooted in international law. These are fundamental principles. One cannot annex other countries. Not even with an argument about international security.”
Vice President J. D. Vance’s reaction came quickly and shows that the USA has not given up Donald Trump’s plans for an annexation of Greenland. On the contrary. Both Trump’s threats and Vance’s initiative show that both an annexation of Greenland and the justification with reference to both the USA’s and international security remain on the Americans’ agenda.
Therefore, it is important that the public demands that the Danish government now concretely implements the Prime Minister’s principled criticism. First and foremost, the government should remember what Trump started his campaign against Greenland and Denmark with.
Reject the USA’s New Ambassador
In a post on Christmas Eve 2024 – already before his inauguration – Trump announced that he had appointed businessman and former ambassador to Sweden, Ken Howery, as the new American ambassador to Denmark.
The appointment was made with the words: “Ken will do a wonderful job representing America’s interests,” which was specified as “ownership and control of Greenland.” Trump still does not rule out the use of economic or military coercion to ensure that Greenland becomes part of the USA.
Now the appointment awaits the Senate’s approval. But this is judged to be merely a formality. Then the USA forwards the appointment to the Danish Foreign Minister for approval.
But with such terms of reference and Trump’s threats of coercion and most recently tariffs on Danish goods, Lars Løkke Rasmussen should refuse to approve the appointment or at the very least demand a changed job description for the ambassador. A response that is both diplomatically correct and cannot be misunderstood.
Stop or Postpone the Agreement on American Bases
Secondly, the government should postpone the Folketing’s second and third readings of the agreement on American bases in Jutland. The first reading on 11 April raised more questions than it answered.
The agreement’s inability to be terminated for 10 years, uncertainty about whether jurisdiction will be Danish or American, whether the surrender of sovereignty is in accordance with the Danish constitution, the lack of Danish access to inspect the bases for weapons or illegal cluster bombs, as well as the bases as obvious bombing targets have created popular opposition – in sharp contrast to what, after the first reading, appears to be a majority in the Folketing for the base agreement.
But several of the parties behind the majority for the base agreement emphasised during the parliamentary debate that the timing of the agreement is extremely unfortunate, and that they would prefer to see the further processing postponed.
A postponement of the base agreement is therefore extremely well-founded and would enable clarification of the many unanswered questions.
In the base agreement, it is stated that Denmark’s international obligations must be respected. Therefore, Denmark should ratify the UN treaty banning nuclear weapons as soon as possible and thereby make the treaty part of Denmark’s international obligations – and thus help prevent nuclear weapons from being placed on the American bases in Jutland.
This would be a sensible concrete Danish response to Trump’s current foreign policy.
Use Denmark’s Seat on the Security Council
Thirdly, Denmark should use its seat on the UN Security Council to create support for Greenland, but also support other countries that have felt Trump’s intensification of American hegemony, for example Panama, Mexico and Canada.
The government’s attempt to gain support in the Nordic countries and EU has undoubtedly been very sensible. But if Denmark also dares to use its seat on the UN Security Council, it can truly herald new times.
Thereby, Denmark can contribute to international law and international conventions becoming pillars in the international legal order, which with the Trump administration has truly come under serious international pressure.
The terms of reference for the new USA ambassador should be changed, the further parliamentary processing of the base agreement should be postponed, and Denmark should explicitly support Greenland and other countries in the UN that are subjected to the USA’s threats – thereby actively contributing to international law once again becoming a pillar in the global legal order.
Tue Magnussen