Trump Is Serious about Greenland. What Does Carney Do?

Core national leaders of the “Coalition of the Willing,” an assemblage of mostly NATO states (minus the US and Russian hangers-on like Hungary and Slovakia), met in Paris last week to discuss the future of the Ukraine peace process. Prime Minister Mark Carney made the trip to underscore Canada’s role. French president Emmanuel Macron gave us a nice shout-out.

Two thundercloud shadows loomed over the meeting: the US raid on Venezuela and the capture of Nicolás Maduro and his wife, and continuing threats made by US officials, including the president, about Greenland.

Trade-offs and tight-rope walking were the order of the day.

How close is Kyiv as opposed to Caracas? The dilemma for the Coalition of the Willing is that the future of Ukraine far outweighs concerns about Venezuela. For there to be any just peace settlement for Ukraine, coalition members know that a US security guarantee and US willingness to serve as a military backstop to European pledges to enforce a peace settlement are vital. This is simply an expression of the current realities of hard power.

Keeping the US in play over a Ukraine peace deal was already complicated and fraught. Overt repudiation of American action in Venezuela potentially threatens future US engagement. On top of that, many coalition members, including Canada, did not recognize the Maduro government as legitimate following its manipulation of the national assembly and the rigging of national election outcomes. None regarded Venezuela as anything less than a failed state that provided opportunities for states like Cuba, Russia, and China to exercise influence.

Here is how Carney walked the Venezuela tightrope at a media scrum in Paris. In response to a question, he stated: “From our perspective, removal of an illegitimate, corrupt repressive government or leader, Mr. Maduro, is welcome news. It creates the possibility for democratic transition in Venezuela. We very much support that. We’re available to support that. And we urge that to happen in a peaceful transition, and that [is] the best prospect for greater prosperity of the Venezuelan people and to respect the will of the Venezuelan people.”

What this avoided, of course, was any reflection on the means used by the US to remove Maduro from power and any comment on the US president’s claims that his administration will “run Venezuela” and US oil companies will move in to capture Venezuelan oil resources.

But yes, Kyiv is closer than Caracas, even for Ottawa.

How close is Nuuk, the capital of Greenland?

In a choreographed moment, Carney met with the prime minister of Denmark, Mette Frederiksen, on the sidelines of the Paris talks on January 6. The read-out of the meeting includes language about their mutual commitment to “enduring support for Ukraine against Russian aggression,” mention of mutual interest in Arctic security, and opportunities for closer security and economic ties between the two countries. Carney also stressed Canada’s support for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Denmark, including Greenland. “The future of Greenland is for Greenland and Denmark to determine,” he stated.

The sentiment was also expressed in a joint statement on Greenland issued in Paris by the Coalition of the Willing leaders of France, Germany, Italy, Poland, Spain, the UK, and Denmark. Strangely, Canada was not a signatory, though Carney “affirmed” Canada’s support for the declaration. The statement, besides stressing that the future of Greenland was for Denmark and Greenland to decide, also highlighted the ways in which European allies are increasing efforts to maintain Arctic security, with the US as a NATO ally and essential partner. Carney, for his part, emphasized the importance that Canada attached to Arctic security and its efforts to ramp up its Arctic military capabilities.

The Élysée statement cheekily reminded the Americans of the defence agreement signed between the US and the Kingdom of Denmark in 1951.

Will protestations about the importance of sovereignty or NATO commitments to Arctic security slow the US down? Following the military success of the Venezuelan operation, Trump has only doubled down on claims about annexing Greenland—claims that reach back to his first term as president. He told reporters on board Air Force One on Sunday, January 4: “We need Greenland for a national security situation. It’s so strategic. Right now, Greenland is covered with Russian and Chinese ships all over the place.”

Russian and Chinese ships all over the place in Greenland? That’s on a par with “here be monsters,” and no less mythological.

Trump’s threat occasioned the strongest language yet from both the Greenland premier, Jens-Frederik Nielsen, and the Danish prime minister, Mette Frederiksen.

Nielsen posted on social media: “Enough is enough. No more pressure. No more insinuations. No more fantasies about annexation.”

Frederiksen took a more end-of-days tone. She is quoted in the media as saying, “The American president should be taken seriously when he says he wants Greenland. If the US chooses to attack another NATO country militarily, then everything stops . . . including the security that has been established since the end of the Second World War.”

Nuuk, too, is a lot closer than Caracas for Canada and its NATO partners. Even the end of NATO as we know it might be getting closer.

How close is Washington, DC? In allied miles, it’s fast receding, but Carney and others still face a difficult geopolitical reality.

Here is how the prime minister put it in Paris. NATO provides security for all, Greenland included. More security is on the way. “We stand with Denmark. We stand with Greenland. Our closest partnership is with the United States, and we’ll work with everybody to make sure that we move forward together.”

Remember the old saying: Keep your friends close, and your enemies closer.

• The United States Has Gone Full Villain
• Canada’s Best Answer to Trump’s New World Order? Build Faster
• Trump’s Terrifying New Security Doctrine Turns Canada into a Target

Carney has said all the right things in response to renewed talk out of Washington about the US “needing” Greenland. But he has also made a point of saying that it is time for a reset in how Canada represents itself to the world. He has talked about the need to move from emphasizing the strength of our values to demonstrating the value of our strength.

There is no better time for this new approach to be put into practice than over the current US threats to Greenland.

MAGA man and White House deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller has flaunted US might and the “iron laws” of great-power predominance and stated that no one is going to fight the US over Greenland. True enough, if it came to that. But how about a little Canadian deterrence, some quiet defiance, a small show of solidarity with Denmark and Greenland before NATO and nearly eighty years of Euro-Atlantic collective security come to an end?

An opportunity beckons. The Canadian foreign minister, Anita Anand, is scheduled to visit Nuuk, along with Governor General Mary Simon, in early February to open the new Canadian consulate. This was planned months ago as a quick fly-in visit. The times have changed. Carney should also make the trip, and not by air.

Send our leaders on a Canadian gunboat, one of the new Arctic offshore patrol vessels, to make the visit to Nuuk from Halifax. Send along a coast guard icebreaker. That might remind the US that it relies on Canadian icebreaking capacity to establish the annual sea-lift supply run to the US space base on Greenland, at Pituffik. Make it a port visit (at the invitation of Greenland). Open the ships to visits from Greenlanders while in Nuuk harbour. Bring along a company of Canadian Rangers from the 1st Canadian Ranger Patrol group (which covers Nunavut, Yukon, and the Northwest Territories), and hold discussions with the Greenland government to help advance their plans for their own Ranger military force. Send along some Junior Rangers as well and have them meet with Greenlandic youth and make school trips. Bring along a demonstration of seaborne and land-based drone capabilities. Leave behind a defence liaison officer as part of the establishment of the Canadian consulate.

A gunboat visit by the prime minister and foreign minister is not just about showing the flag. It could also involve wide-ranging discussions about how Canada could co-operate with Denmark and Greenland on the expansion of joint Arctic military capabilities. There is expertise we can bring to bear in Arctic military operations and opportunities for Canadian defence exports (patrol vessels, surveillance aircraft, drone capabilities, sensor systems).

Greenland is our closest Arctic neighbour (alongside Alaska, of course), and we have a long history of civil co-operation with Greenland through the Arctic Council, in search-and-rescue and fisheries agreements, environmental protection, science and climate research, and people-to-people ties. Nunavut and Greenland have cemented relations through sectoral memoranda of understanding. The Inuit Circumpolar Council plays a key role in bringing the Inuit of Canada and Greenland together.

Greenland produced a Foreign, Security, and Defence Policy document in February 2024. The Greenland strategy was pre-Trump and based on a now outdated premise that the Arctic would remain an area of low tension. But the Greenlandic statement did enshrine one important principle: “All relations are based on the premise that Greenland and the Greenlandic people constitute an independent people and country.”

Our own Arctic Foreign Policy, produced in 2024, is as out of date and dodo-ish as the Greenlandic Arctic strategy. While it recognized growing competition and potential geopolitical tension in the Arctic region, its primary concern was the impact of the Russian invasion of Ukraine on co-operative Arctic diplomacy and engagement, particularly through the Arctic Council. The bedrock assumption of the Arctic Foreign Policy was the maintenance of North American Arctic security through close co-operation with the US. For example, the document stated: “Canada must work even closer with its closest ally, the United States, to maintain a secure North American homeland.” And: “We expect Canada-US defence cooperation in the Arctic to continue to grow, as it is fundamental to both countries’ national security interests.”

What couldn’t be imagined, in advance of Trump’s second presidency, was that the US might not see it that way, might not place value on preserving allied relations with Canada, might threaten a NATO partner, might try to annex Greenland by hook or by crook. A doctrine of “America First” and of US western hemispheric dominance has completely upset old certainties.

This new reality for Canada will require massive adjustments in approach, with a greater emphasis on sovereign autonomy and Canadian military capabilities de-linked from those of the US, coupled with new security partnerships among Arctic states. One immediate element should be strengthening security relations with Greenland. If any NATO partner needs to step up on the Greenland issue, it is Canada.

Gunboat diplomacy to Nuuk (well, of course, we won’t call it that) sends a message, one that needs to be heard in Nuuk, in Copenhagen, and in Washington.

Adapted from “Canada’s increasingly complicated security geography” and “Gunboat diplomacy, Canada style” by Wesley Wark (Substack). Reprinted with permission of the author.