US President Donald Trump has said he may impose trade tariffs on countries that do not support his plans to take over Greenland.
“I may put a tariff on countries if they don’t go along with Greenland, because we need Greenland for national security,” Mr Trump said at the White House.
The other countries can simply not oblige (and thus kill NATO). That’s the more realistic option.
Lol no they wouldn’t. Neither would they care about who owns Greenland (except probably Russia), neither would they waste immense amounts of money and manpower to fight the biggest military and economy in the world for no real gain, and neither would 2/3 of the listed countries (Ru, NK) be able to do anything serious against US anyway (outside of suicidally throwing nukes at it).
I don’t see it.
Sure, the various NATO countries who aren’t Denmark can simply say ‘sorry man we’re out’ and dissolve NATO. Or just refuse to comply, damn the consequences.
They won’t though, because in many cases the threat of NATO is the only thing protecting them.
Look at Eastern Europe on the Russian border- Finland, Estonia, Latvia. Belarus is a RU puppet and Ukraine might lose their war so we can include Lithuania, Poland, Slovakia, Hungary, and Romania too. Russia has Navy assets in the Black Sea so you can also consider Bulgaria and Turkey.
If NATO went away tomorrow, do you really think Russia wouldn’t try to gobble one or two of them up? You really think they wouldn’t succeed in at least one or two cases?
And what about Canada? They’re a NATO member and they have real military force. Same with UK, Norway, Sweden, Germany.
Do any of them WANT to go up against USA? Of course not.
If the US truly went rogue and invaded a sovereign nation, would they do it? Probably, because if they didn’t, there’s no guarantee they wouldn’t be next.
They DGAF about Greenland. Greenland isn’t worth shit.
But for any of them to reduce the US’s role in the world economy or worldwide diplomacy, that’s a golden opportunity.
Thing is they needn’t commit huge resources to the war. Just a small force that would be able to make it hurt for the US, and the real war is fought in the media. It gives them a chance to be the heroes and paint US as the villain.
Lumping Baltic countries together with Hungary and Slovakia shows you don’t actually know much about the political situation there and shouldn’t try to make predictions about them.
The rest of your comment is too implausible for me to want to discuss it in detail. I really don’t get the impression you’ve actually thought through any of the scenarios you’re coming up with. Canada fighting the most powerful military in the world that completely surrounds it on land? China attacking its biggest individual trading partner (by teleporting soldiers onto the other side of the world somehow) and having anything to gain from destabilising the world economy? Wars aren’t carried out in the media, Trump won’t be stopped and Greenland won’t be defended with a new round of “Trump bad” articles in US media.
The powerful ones simply wouldn’t be next. Weak ones might be, but they in particular won’t be able to do shit about Greenland.
The conflict, if it comes to it, will play out through less direct means.