Some Republican senators are increasingly voicing opposition to President Trump’s remarks suggesting the United States could take control of Greenland by force, as a bipartisan group of lawmakers prepares to visit Denmark to reassure its leaders that Congress would not support any military action targeting the territory.
As the Hill reported, Sens. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) and Thom Tillis (R-NC) are among several U.S. lawmakers scheduled to travel to Copenhagen on Friday, alongside Democratic colleagues Sens. Chris Coons (D-DE), Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH), and Dick Durbin (D-IL), as well as Reps. Gregory Meeks (D-NY), Madeleine Dean (D-PA), and Sara Jacobs (D-CA).
Tillis emphasized that he will remind Danish officials that Congress is a coequal branch of government, and said he believes “there [is a] sufficient number of members, whether they speak up or not, that are concerned with this.” Speaking about any use of military force to take Greenland, he stated, “The actual execution of anything that would involve a taking of a sovereign territory that is part of a sovereign nation, I think would be met with pretty substantial opposition in Congress.”
Shaheen and Murkowski are senior members of the Senate Appropriations Committee. Together, they cosponsored a bill to prohibit the use of Defense and State Department funds for any military action against Greenland or any sovereign territory of a NATO member state.
A GOP senator who requested anonymity told the Hill, “You see, more than in other incidents, pushback by Republican senators on this topic.” The senator claimed that an aggressive move on Greenland could destabilize NATO and endanger Ukraine. “We absolutely need NATO support [for] Ukraine. Diminishing the capabilities of NATO to do that is a death knell to people in Ukraine.”
Senate Defense Appropriations Subcommittee Chair Mitch McConnell (R-KY) called Trump’s statements “ill-advised threats” and warned on the Senate floor that acting on them could “incinerate the hard-won trust of loyal allies in exchange for no meaningful change in U.S. access to the Arctic.” McConnell suggested that the consequences would be worse for Trump’s legacy than the U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan was for President Biden’s.
Senate Appropriations Chair Susan Collins (R-ME) similarly rejected the proposal, stating she does not support the president’s plan to annex Greenland by force or against the will of the people. “I do believe that Greenland would be amenable to the U.S. expanding its base that already exists there or its military presence to send a message to China, Russia. But that can be done through diplomatic negotiations, not through threats and intimidation,” she argued.
Sen. Roger Wicker (R-MS), who leads the Senate Armed Services Committee, remarked, “I had a meeting with the Danish ambassador to the United States and several officials from the Greenland government. It’s pretty clear that there’s no room for negotiation on the topic of ownership” However, Wicker added, “I do believe there are real opportunities for partnership in the area of critical minerals and bases.”
President Trump has maintained that acquiring Greenland is essential to U.S. national security. In a recent Truth Social post, he wrote, “The United States needs Greenland for the purpose of National Security. It is vital for the Golden Dome that we are building.” He also warned that if the U.S. does not act, China or Russia will move in, saying, “If we don’t take Greenland, Russia or China will take Greenland, and I’m not gonna let that happen.”
Trump has also pointed to Greenland’s minimal defenses as justification for U.S. intervention. “Basically, their defense is two dog sleds. You know that? You know what their defense is? Two dog sleds,” he said, while speaking aboard Air Force One. “In the meantime, you have Russian destroyers and submarines, and China destroyers and submarines all over the place.”
White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt noted using the military “is always an option at the commander in chief’s disposal.” Trump reiterated that sentiment, saying, “NATO becomes far more formidable and effective with Greenland in the hands of the United States. Anything less than that is unacceptable.”
Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) strongly rejected that stance, stating on CBS that he would do “everything” to stop any military takeover of Greenland. In a separate interview on ABC, he asserted, “I think you’d be hard-pressed to find somebody in Washington who’s for a military invasion on either side of the aisle.”
European NATO allies have responded by deploying small military contingents to Greenland, with France, Germany, and the UK joining Danish-led operations. President Emmanuel Macron announced French troops were joining Danish-organized exercises, while the UK sent a single officer as part of a reconnaissance group.
Amid the debate, some voices in Europe have endorsed greater U.S. involvement. Former MI6 chief Sir Richard Dearlove contended that only the United States has the military capability to effectively defend the Arctic and rhetorically proposed that Denmark could lease Greenland to the U.S. for a hundred years to reinforce European security.
Regardless, Greenland’s five leading political parties stated, “We do not want to be Americans, we do not want to be Danes, we want to be Greenlanders.”
Read the full article here