The response from Europe?
“Everything would come to an end”
“If the United States were to choose to attack another NATO country, then everything would come to an end,” emphasized Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen of Denmark. “The international community as we know it, democratic rules of the game, NATO, the world’s strongest defensive alliance — all of that would collapse if one NATO country chose to attack another.”
The collective leaders of NATO – including Prime Ministers and President of the United Kingdom, Germany, France, Italy, Poland and Spain – rushed out a collective joint statement on Jan. 6 that made clear their focus:
“Arctic security remains a key priority for Europe and it is critical for international and transatlantic security. NATO has made clear that the Arctic region is a priority and European Allies are stepping up. We and many other Allies have increased our presence, activities and investments, to keep the Arctic safe and to deter adversaries.
“The Kingdom of Denmark – including Greenland – is part of NATO. Security in the Arctic must therefore be achieved collectively, in conjunction with NATO allies including the United States, by upholding the principles of the UN Charter, including sovereignty, territorial integrity and the inviolability of borders. These are universal principles, and we will not stop defending them.”
The key point? Article Five of the 75-year-old NATO charter, which was signed and put into effect in 1949 in Washington, D.C., requires a collective defense against an aggressor, once thought to be the Soviet Union. Article Five stipulates that an attack on one represents an attack on all, thus requiring a joint response. Canada, America’s physical neighbor to the north, is a full NATO member.
International collapse?
Were the United States to militarily engage Greenland and Danish forces in an effort to seize control, the NATO Alliance would be effectively shattered.
Is this all brinkmanship deal-making bluster from the U.S. President, who once garnered Nielsen ratings for creating conflict on a network television program?
Not according to Denmark’s Prime Minister, who asserts that the American leader “should be taken seriously” about Greenland, especially concerning comments that threaten to annex the semiautonomous Danish territory.
One must wonder if Russian President Vladimir Putin chortles out loud over the frenzied energy and chaos presently engulfing the European Continent, a group of nations that is attempting to collectively assume a defensive role in a potential Russian cessation of hostilities from Putin’s invasion of Ukraine.
Why is President Trump so interested in Greenland? There are a variety of good reasons – from both economic and national security perspectives – especially as warming global waters peel away and melt formerly impassable arctic ice. As this blog stated earlier in 2025: “Two colossal special economic zones [now] rise on the eastern shores of Russia and China that can open new dynamic ports on the Sea of Japan with deep-water drafts for ocean-going ships. The formerly contested Bolshoy Ussuriyski Island in far east Russia (called Heixiazi Island in China) is today the site of a new major joint development project that can foster an international transport corridor. Such access would help relieve the loss of Russia’s European markets, which are largely presently closed because of American-dollar-backed sanctions.”
The irony is that America already has a significant military base on Greenland – and no request for upping a U.S. military presence has yet been denied by either Denmark or Greenland.
Europe – a future grass playground for superpowers?
As the Wall Street Journal reported on Jan 7 (2026), European allies fear Trump’s actions may lead to “a division of great-power spheres of influence, with the U.S. China and Russia becoming regional hegemons while curtailing the sovereignty of smaller nations.” While European nations “try to salvage what is left of the West,” one is reminded of the words of uber-diplomat William J. Burns, who wrote before becoming CIA Director that “Europeans, understandably, fear that they could become the grass on which the elephants of great power competition trample — with little to gain and much to lose” (The Back Channel, page 431).
As Europe continues to be politically battered, one must review the comments from this blog penned a little less than a year ago, when President Trump first assumed power:
As chronicled in the 13th and 17th chapters of the book of Revelation, a vast geopolitical power of unprecedented magnitude will one day engulf the earth. This is described in ancient Greek as a world-ruling Thērion, a savage and aggressive leader who will herald in both global prosperity and crushing political will.
The good news, as stated a year ago? President Donald J. Trump is not that world-ruling Thērion, as can be established for a variety of reasons.
But a critical question exists and today’s news only amplified its vital nature: will President Trump play a vital role in establishing the foundation for that coming world-ruling Thērion? Indeed, is that in fact a possible true “purpose” that the Almighty may have in mind? A foundation, that once laid, may result in unanticipated events bursting out everywhere and all at once?
This question is again posed respectfully for consideration, without malice, but with a heightening sense of urgency.
If NATO crumbles – whether by an unstrained act of the President, an unexpected turn of events (including the possibility of an unspeakable use of tactical battlefield nuclear weapons), or economic devastation from a presently unseen rending of the dollar, or worse – what will replace it?
A possible response? Consider this ancient advice, from none other than Jesus the Messiah: “Learn this lesson from the fig tree: As soon as its twigs get tender and its leaves come out, you know that summer is near” (Matthew 24:32, New International Version).
Discover more from Seeking The Way
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.