The pot has boiled over

When Trump first came out and said, “We want to buy Greenland,” most people laughed it off.

Hardly anyone took it seriously.

The Western media presented the issue as an “oddity,” a “Trump show,” or even a diplomatic absurdity.

How could the US set its sights on the territory of a NATO member country, and not only set its sights on it but also say, “You must give this place to me!”

Since this approach would completely pull the plug on NATO, no one believed that the classic state of mind in Washington would give the green light.

However, it soon became clear that the matter was neither a joke nor a momentary delusion.

Trump was quite serious.

The market was thrown into chaos on the Old Continent.

Let’s not call it a matter of honor, but it is highly probable that they thought, “There is a possibility that our turn will come,” as Europe’s haughty politicians began to back Denmark one after another.

We saw that the diplomatic sentences scattered about had no effect on the other side of the Atlantic.

On the contrary, this time Trump targeted the eight European countries that supported Denmark and said “no” to the transfer of Greenland to the US.

Alarm bells began to ring in Europe.

He decided to impose customs duties on goods coming from these countries. The Western alliance literally cracked.

In addition to Denmark, the list includes Norway, Sweden, France, Germany, the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, and Finland.

These taxes will start at a rate of 10 percent as of February 1, and if an agreement cannot be reached for the “full and complete sale” of Greenland, they will rise to 25 percent starting June 1, 2026.

The matter is quite serious.

The European economy will be on the verge of collapse, let no one have any doubt. It is also certain that it will not reflect very positively on the world economy.

Let’s put on our reading glasses.

The total value of trade in goods and services between the Old Continent and the New World was approximately 1.5 trillion dollars as of 2024.

We can consider this to be about a quarter of global trade.

In other words, the two sides are economically dependent on each other. They are the world’s largest bilateral trade and investment partners and have the most integrated economic relationship.

Millions of jobs in the US are linked to EU-US trade and investment.

But trade in goods is entirely in the EU’s favor; it exports to the US at a level of 605 billion dollars. The US’s exports to the EU are around 370 billion dollars.

That is, there is a deficit of 235 billion dollars.

In the last 10 years, the EU’s exports to the US have increased by 44 percent. Germany and France are leading the way in this. They are far ahead in the sale of machinery, equipment, chemicals, pharmaceuticals, and luxury consumer goods.

This is the reason why Trump has been shouting for years, “Europe is exploiting us.”

The numbers are correct, but this is only half the story.

The US has a clear superiority in the service sector.

The US’s service exports to the EU are 295 billion dollars, while the EU’s exports to the US are 206 billion dollars. Here, we see a surplus of 90 billion dollars in favor of the US. It holds the reins in areas such as finance, insurance, software, digital platforms, consulting, defense, and technology licenses.

So, it is the side that collects the money here.

Trump is aware that sectors with the highest value-added create high profit margins, strategic power, and long-term dependency.

In short, by saying, “The US security umbrella is not free,” he effectively dismantled the table that was set up with Europe after World War II and expanded after the collapse of the Soviet Union.

He turned trade into an extension of security and changed the rules of the game.

So, why did Trump risk destroying such an interdependent economic-commercial ecosystem entirely instead of trying to fix it and turn it in favor of the US?

Let us say that the US’s newly emerging techno-feudal class has a major influence on this. They want the old structure to be demolished for a new system where they will take full control.

They are calling the shots in the White House.

They see Greenland as a geography with strategic importance. The issue is not that it is on the doorstep of the Arctic. For example, even its climate is practically tailor-made for the 'servers' that are the lifeblood of the 'artificial intelligence' technology they plan to use to run the world in the coming century.

Let’s continue...

In short, when Trump made such a decision, Europe did not delay in reacting.

Both the President of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, and the President of the European Council warned that the customs duties “carry the risk of leading to a dangerous spiral.”

The most notable statement came from British Prime Minister Keir Starmer. He said this decision was completely wrong, stating, “Such a step against NATO allies is unacceptable.”

We do not know how seriously those in the White House took his statement, but considering that the United Kingdom is the only other country with which the US has a truly “strategic partnership” outside of Israel, we can say that with this decision, Trump has severely undermined the Washington leg of the power brokers in London.

So, can the UK risk a confrontation with the US from a political and strategic perspective?

It is not easy.

They are certainly calculating that this is likely to have consequences that will manifest at different points globally.

Even if they have forty foxes running around in their heads, the fact that the matter is extremely simple from Trump’s perspective could leave the UK facing a difficult choice.

For example, if someone from London comes out tomorrow or the next day and says, “Let’s find a formula that the parties will agree to so that the Western alliance does not enter a crisis,” let us not be surprised.

In other words, the UK could backtrack from its current political position.

The others are looking at the issue from a more open perspective.

For instance, Swedish Prime Minister Ulf Kristersson described the threat as “blackmail” and said it would not be bowed to, and other leaders like French President Macron said that such bullying is contrary to international norms, but it is unclear how much they are taken into account on the other side of the Atlantic.

Let’s not drag this out; the Western alliance was already showing alarm signals for a long time. Although this dissolution, which became visible especially with the UK’s Brexit process, seemed to have been postponed somewhat with the Ukraine war, Trump’s combining of trade and security policy to use it as a tool of pressure on his allies has pushed European geopolitics into a real impasse.

The fact that allied countries are strongly rejecting this threat from an economic and political perspective has no practical meaning.

Because this situation is not just a simple tariff issue; it has also brought with it the questioning of trust relationships, alliance loyalty, and international law principles. This has strongly shaken the balances of the West.

We are at a historic turning point.

Let us put a period here for now, saying that we will make how this crisis ends and a few possible scenarios regarding the issue the subject of the next article.