Greenland press opinions: “The position of moral superiority combined with military impotence is original” | EUROtoday

US President Donald Trump has threatened extra tariffs in opposition to Denmark and its supporting nations over the Greenland challenge. The dispute can be a subject within the international media. Commentators in EU nations, but in addition Australia and even Russia, assess the state of affairs accordingly.

„The Times“, Großbritannien:

“It is not just the crude attempt to use tariffs, normally used to regulate global trade, as leverage against anyone who opposes Trump’s policies that has angered Europeans. Likewise, the threat to inflict economic harm on other NATO members if they defy Washington’s desire to seize territory – even through invasion if necessary – belonging to a loyal, if small, military ally has contributed.

Read all developments on the dispute between Denmark and the USA in our Greenland ticker

For Britain, which is still trying to reach a new trade deal with the United States, a further increase in tariffs would be disastrous, senior business leaders said. For Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer it would be a humiliating mockery of his much-vaunted attempt to protect Britain’s vast exports to the US by building good personal relations with the volatile and unpredictable US president. (…)

Sir Keir and the other Europeans would respond best by taking advantage of the growing doubts within the US Congress – including among Republicans – about the Greenland adventure. With clever diplomatic moves, Congress could be persuaded to take action. Ultimately, it is up to Americans to convince their president that he has chosen the wrong course.”

“Neue Zürcher Zeitung” (NZZ), Switzerland:

“Although many European items are topic to an import tax of 15 % within the USA, it supplies for tariff exemption for American industrial items within the EU. Many parliamentarians had been already aggravated by this imbalance earlier than this weekend. They noticed the settlement extra as a colonial treaty than an settlement between two equal companions. It is subsequently fairly attainable that the EU Parliament will cease the implementation of the settlement. (…)

But the measure might be probably the most the EU may carry itself to do. There may be parliamentarians who assume that the confederation of states ought to lastly use the ‘Anti-Coercion Instrument’ (ACI) in opposition to the USA, which supplies for countermeasures if a rustic coerces the EU economically.

High punitive tariffs or monetary sanctions in opposition to corporations and governments are then attainable. However, thus far the EU has shied away from making use of the ACI. That is more likely to be the case this time too; the EU would irritate Trump an excessive amount of with this instrument. Europe wants the USA – as a buying and selling accomplice and help within the Ukraine battle. The EU is subsequently more likely to rely above all on the American Congress setting limits on Trump.”

“De Telegraaf”, Netherlands

“It is time for Europe to act more decisively against US President Donald Trump. He is trying to impose his will by constantly making threats and announcing new trade tariffs. The Netherlands and the other European Union states should no longer behave like Calimero the chick, but hit back hard. (…)

US President Donald Trump has declared that he wants to own Greenland for ‘national security’ reasons. But isn’t it the basic idea of ​​NATO that America and Europe act together? The Netherlands and other partners recognize the security risks that Trump cites regarding Greenland. And they are ready to respond together.

China and Canada have proven that Trump can solely be impressed by robust solutions. EU nations lastly appear to grasp this, as stories of attainable European countermeasures with commerce tariffs present.

That’s proper. For far too lengthy we’ve made ourselves smaller than essential. With 500 million shoppers, Europe is a vital marketplace for America, and high corporations like ASML are very important to the U.S. know-how sector. We should pay attention to our personal energy and have the braveness to pay Trump again in form. Otherwise it should proceed to roll over us.”

„Irish Times“, Irland:

“If US President Donald Trump makes good on his threat to impose tariffs on eight European countries, the EU must respond. And forcefully. There is debate and disagreement about how quickly the EU should now act, especially given that Trump has failed to follow through on some of his previous tariff threats. But it must be made clear to the US President that the EU will defend itself against his latest attempt to bully it. (…)

The chaotic nature of the US president’s political statements could suggest that he will use some excuse to back away from the threatened tariffs. A decision by the US Supreme Court on the legal basis on which many tariffs were imposed by the US government could also change the situation.

However, the EU – as well as the two non-EU countries Norway and Great Britain – should assume that the threatened additional tariffs will actually be imposed from the beginning of next month. And she has to decide how she’s going to respond.”

“Sydney Morning Herald”, Australia:

“European leaders are warning of a dangerous downward spiral in relations with the US over the Greenland dispute and are considering sweeping retaliation against President Donald Trump, who is threatening new tariffs on European exports. However, the eight leaders are careful to avoid personal statements that could further inflame the dispute with Trump, which has the potential to destroy the NATO alliance. (…)

There is still a chance that reason will prevail: that Trump will give in on tariffs and agree to a security agreement on Greenland that gives him more military bases but not full control. To do this, Europe would have to stand firm without provoking Trump – admittedly an almost impossible task with such an unpredictable president.

The alternative is the collapse of NATO. Trump could respond to a trade war by using force against American allies and seizing Greenland despite their protests. In this previously unthinkable scenario, the alliance collapses and Europe is left defenseless. And it all depends on who will replace Trump one day.”

„The Age“, Australien:

“Why Trump is so vehemently pushing to own Greenland is unclear – especially since both Denmark and the Greenlanders themselves point out that the US can build as many military bases as it wants under a 1951 treaty and that US companies are open to developing the island’s considerable mineral resources. (…)

Since the USA could protect its security policy interests without owning Greenland, it is reasonable to suspect that the real reason for Trump’s insistence on appropriation – if necessary by force – is personal ambition: he wants to leave a legacy that is linked to a large-scale expansion of US territory.

Greenland’s land area is larger than that acquired by the United States in 1803 with the Louisiana Purchase, which nearly doubled the size of the country at the time. This is about Trump’s ego, not national security.”

“Moskovsky Komsomolets”, Russia:

“Now something even more unthinkable is being discussed on the pages of the English press. After EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and Council of Europe President António Costa protested against Donald Trump’s plans to annex Greenland, the Americans declared that from February 1, 2026, a ten percent import duty will be levied on goods from Denmark, Norway, Sweden, France, Germany, Great Britain, the Netherlands and Finland. The English “The The Economist defined that the Europeans may use some leverage on this. It can be attention-grabbing to see what levers may very well be used.(…)

Britain is, in fact, a nuclear energy. And that is the one motive they’re nonetheless within the large boys’ membership. Of course, the technique of transporting their nuclear warheads are purely American. Another brushstroke to explain European energy: When (Muammar al-)Gaddafi was overthrown in 2011, the Europeans could not even shut the airspace. They do have airplanes, however AWACS and satellite tv for pc reconnaissance are lacking. So in fact they’ll come into battle with the USA – however provided that they don’t seem to be afraid to face alone in opposition to the horrible and horrible Russian empire.

The political scientist Fyodor Lukyanov, who’s well-known in Europe, as soon as put it very elegantly for a distinct motive: ‘The place of ethical superiority mixed with army impotence is kind of unique.’”