Vance arrives, and negotiations between Medan and Greenland begin.
2026-01-14 18:02:12
US President Trump has repeatedly stated that the US "must" gain control of the Arctic island, and has not ruled out the possibility of taking it by force. This tough stance has forced the EU, Denmark, and Greenland to join forces to deal with the situation. A key meeting concerning the survival of NATO and the geopolitical landscape of the Arctic will officially take place at the White House on Wednesday evening.
Meanwhile, Washington suddenly announced a change in attendees, with Vice President Vance taking the lead instead. Vance is a figure who has always been assertive towards Greenland, and a geopolitical storm is about to erupt.
The core lineup for this meeting has been finalized: Greenland's Foreign Minister Vivian Mozfeldt and Denmark's Foreign Minister Lars Løkke Rasmussen will face US Vice President JD Vance and Secretary of State Marco Rubio.
As a key arena for the Trump administration's ongoing annexation plan, this meeting was seen by outsiders as a "high-risk game that stakes on the geopolitical landscape." Ian Lesser, a senior researcher at the German Marshall Fund, a Washington think tank, had already warned that if the diplomatic deadlock could not be broken, it would not only tear apart NATO's cohesion but also directly shake the very foundation of this military alliance.
Behind the dispute lies a contest of core demands between the US and the EU. EU member states have made it clear that military confrontation would have disastrous consequences for NATO, and seeking a negotiated solution is the only viable path.
In order to enable Trump to claim a political victory domestically, the EU is urgently finalizing a framework for a dual-objective agreement: one that satisfies US demands without undermining the foundations of the European security system.
According to multiple diplomats and EU officials, the compromise plan focuses on two main directions: first, strengthening Arctic security deployments within the NATO framework, encouraging European countries to increase their security spending in the region, aligning with Trump's demand that Europe take on more responsibility for its own security; and second, making strategic concessions on the development of key mineral resources in Greenland, exploring the possibility of allowing American companies to participate in mining on preferential terms and share the profits.
Behind the EU's compromising stance lies a clear understanding of Greenland's actual production capacity.
Currently, the island has limited mining capacity, and Denmark has been seeking long-term investment for many years without success. The EU plans to double its investment in Greenland in its next long-term budget, including dedicated funding for minerals. This has become a key bargaining chip in attracting the US to accept the joint investment agreement.
However, a diplomat revealed that Denmark had opened its investment channels to the United States years ago but was rejected. Therefore, Trump's true intentions have sparked much speculation: whether it is a strategic move against Russia or an attempt to "make history" through geographical expansion and translate "Make America Great Again" into tangible results of territorial expansion remains to be seen.
Faced with pressure from the United States, Greenland and Denmark have demonstrated a firm united front.
Greenland's Prime Minister Jens-Frederik Nielsen stated clearly at a joint press conference that if forced to choose between the United States and Denmark, "we will definitely stand with Denmark." Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen bluntly stated that the pressure from the United States was "completely intolerable" and that "the toughest test is yet to come."
Last week, several European leaders, including those from France, Germany, and the United Kingdom, publicly sided with Greenland, emphasizing in a joint statement that "Greenland's fate belongs solely to its people, and only Denmark and Greenland have the right to decide on related matters."
An even more serious risk lies in the survival of NATO. Both EU Defense Commissioner Andrius Kubilius and the Danish Prime Minister warned that direct US intervention in the territories of NATO allies would lead to the disintegration of NATO, bringing "all cooperation to an abrupt halt."
A NATO diplomat revealed that the 1949 treaty that established NATO contained no provisions for “allies attacking allies,” and that such a situation would “mean the complete end of the alliance.”
Trump had previously stated publicly that he might need to choose between "ambitions to control Greenland" and "maintaining the integrity of the alliance," further exacerbating the uncertainty of the situation.
The direction of the talks was also affected by the adjustment of the US negotiating lineup, which was originally planned to be chaired by Secretary of State Rubio, who had a relatively moderate stance.
Washington then suddenly announced that Vice President Vance would take charge—this vice president was very assertive on the Greenland issue, had publicly humiliated Denmark, and was a hardliner who had made many “outrageous demands,” leading former Swedish Prime Minister Carl Bildt to predict that “the talks would definitely be very heated, and it was basically impossible to finalize a solution on the spot.”
However, optimistically, the two sides may be able to reach a consensus and initiate subsequent negotiation procedures.
For Denmark and Greenland, the ideal outcome of the talks would be for the US to explicitly recognize Greenland's sovereignty and its status within the Kingdom of Denmark; in exchange, they might restart negotiations on economic and security cooperation agreements with the US, including opening up the mining market and increasing investment in Arctic security.
Regardless of the outcome, this game over the Arctic islands has profoundly impacted transatlantic relations. The former transatlantic alliance is facing unprecedented challenges, and the security and resource landscape of the Arctic region will be redefined in this game.
Any signs of geopolitical escalation could continue to boost safe-haven assets such as gold and US Treasury bonds, while simultaneously suppressing the euro against the dollar and raising the dollar against the Danish krone.
(Euro/USD daily chart, source: FX678)
At 17:59 Beijing time, the euro was trading at 1.1651/52 against the US dollar.
Meanwhile, Washington suddenly announced a change in attendees, with Vice President Vance taking the lead instead. Vance is a figure who has always been assertive towards Greenland, and a geopolitical storm is about to erupt.
Focus Meeting: White House Showdown Lineup and High-Risk Predictions
The core lineup for this meeting has been finalized: Greenland's Foreign Minister Vivian Mozfeldt and Denmark's Foreign Minister Lars Løkke Rasmussen will face US Vice President JD Vance and Secretary of State Marco Rubio.
As a key arena for the Trump administration's ongoing annexation plan, this meeting was seen by outsiders as a "high-risk game that stakes on the geopolitical landscape." Ian Lesser, a senior researcher at the German Marshall Fund, a Washington think tank, had already warned that if the diplomatic deadlock could not be broken, it would not only tear apart NATO's cohesion but also directly shake the very foundation of this military alliance.
Core of the Game: Decoding the EU's Compromise and the US's Demands
Behind the dispute lies a contest of core demands between the US and the EU. EU member states have made it clear that military confrontation would have disastrous consequences for NATO, and seeking a negotiated solution is the only viable path.
In order to enable Trump to claim a political victory domestically, the EU is urgently finalizing a framework for a dual-objective agreement: one that satisfies US demands without undermining the foundations of the European security system.
According to multiple diplomats and EU officials, the compromise plan focuses on two main directions: first, strengthening Arctic security deployments within the NATO framework, encouraging European countries to increase their security spending in the region, aligning with Trump's demand that Europe take on more responsibility for its own security; and second, making strategic concessions on the development of key mineral resources in Greenland, exploring the possibility of allowing American companies to participate in mining on preferential terms and share the profits.
Practical Considerations: The Mystery of Greenland's Production Bottleneck and Trump's Intentions
Behind the EU's compromising stance lies a clear understanding of Greenland's actual production capacity.
Currently, the island has limited mining capacity, and Denmark has been seeking long-term investment for many years without success. The EU plans to double its investment in Greenland in its next long-term budget, including dedicated funding for minerals. This has become a key bargaining chip in attracting the US to accept the joint investment agreement.
However, a diplomat revealed that Denmark had opened its investment channels to the United States years ago but was rejected. Therefore, Trump's true intentions have sparked much speculation: whether it is a strategic move against Russia or an attempt to "make history" through geographical expansion and translate "Make America Great Again" into tangible results of territorial expansion remains to be seen.
Opposing Factions: A United Front Between Greenland and Denmark
Faced with pressure from the United States, Greenland and Denmark have demonstrated a firm united front.
Greenland's Prime Minister Jens-Frederik Nielsen stated clearly at a joint press conference that if forced to choose between the United States and Denmark, "we will definitely stand with Denmark." Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen bluntly stated that the pressure from the United States was "completely intolerable" and that "the toughest test is yet to come."
Last week, several European leaders, including those from France, Germany, and the United Kingdom, publicly sided with Greenland, emphasizing in a joint statement that "Greenland's fate belongs solely to its people, and only Denmark and Greenland have the right to decide on related matters."
Fatal Risk: The Existence Crisis of the NATO Alliance
An even more serious risk lies in the survival of NATO. Both EU Defense Commissioner Andrius Kubilius and the Danish Prime Minister warned that direct US intervention in the territories of NATO allies would lead to the disintegration of NATO, bringing "all cooperation to an abrupt halt."
A NATO diplomat revealed that the 1949 treaty that established NATO contained no provisions for “allies attacking allies,” and that such a situation would “mean the complete end of the alliance.”
Trump had previously stated publicly that he might need to choose between "ambitions to control Greenland" and "maintaining the integrity of the alliance," further exacerbating the uncertainty of the situation.
Unexpected Variable: The replacement of Vance in the US negotiating team raises concerns.
The direction of the talks was also affected by the adjustment of the US negotiating lineup, which was originally planned to be chaired by Secretary of State Rubio, who had a relatively moderate stance.
Washington then suddenly announced that Vice President Vance would take charge—this vice president was very assertive on the Greenland issue, had publicly humiliated Denmark, and was a hardliner who had made many “outrageous demands,” leading former Swedish Prime Minister Carl Bildt to predict that “the talks would definitely be very heated, and it was basically impossible to finalize a solution on the spot.”
However, optimistically, the two sides may be able to reach a consensus and initiate subsequent negotiation procedures.
Outcome Prediction: Ideal Outcome and Impact on the Overall Situation
For Denmark and Greenland, the ideal outcome of the talks would be for the US to explicitly recognize Greenland's sovereignty and its status within the Kingdom of Denmark; in exchange, they might restart negotiations on economic and security cooperation agreements with the US, including opening up the mining market and increasing investment in Arctic security.
Regardless of the outcome, this game over the Arctic islands has profoundly impacted transatlantic relations. The former transatlantic alliance is facing unprecedented challenges, and the security and resource landscape of the Arctic region will be redefined in this game.
Any signs of geopolitical escalation could continue to boost safe-haven assets such as gold and US Treasury bonds, while simultaneously suppressing the euro against the dollar and raising the dollar against the Danish krone.
(Euro/USD daily chart, source: FX678)
At 17:59 Beijing time, the euro was trading at 1.1651/52 against the US dollar.
- Risk Warning and Disclaimer
- The market involves risk, and trading may not be suitable for all investors. This article is for reference only and does not constitute personal investment advice, nor does it take into account certain users’ specific investment objectives, financial situation, or other needs. Any investment decisions made based on this information are at your own risk.
