European leaders have expressed their unwavering support for Denmark and Greenland’s autonomy, a stance that is further straining relations between the United States and Europe.

The willingness of the U.S. to challenge its NATO allies with territorial ambitions is seen as weakening the alliance’s essential deterrent power.

“If adversaries view NATO as fractured and dominated by the U.S., they might question the alliance’s commitment and strength,” Genauer remarked.

According to Trump, tariffs will remain in place “until a comprehensive agreement for the acquisition of Greenland is secured.”

“NATO’s infrastructure, which includes its headquarters, communication systems, and aircraft, is collectively owned by the alliance,” he added.

“Without the U.S., it’s doubtful that Europe, Canada, and Iceland could sustain these systems. This situation prompts the question of whether the European Union should take a more active role,” he concluded.

“There’s also obviously a lot of physical and institutional infrastructure in NATO in terms of the headquarters — there’s communication systems, there’s also aircraft and whatnot that are all owned by the alliance,” he said.

Can the treaty be replaced?

“I don’t think the Europeans, Canada and Iceland could maintain it without them [the US]. And that raises the question of whether the European Union should step up,” he said.

In the meantime, a weakened NATO is concerning for many European nations, Frühling said, which are concerned by spillover violence from the war in Ukraine and the potential of future Russian invasions.

A ‘dilemma’ for Australian foreign policy