Greenland sovereignty was thrust back into the European agenda on Tuesday, 6 January 2026, after a group of European leaders issued a joint statement saying that “Greenland belongs to its people” and that only Denmark and Greenland can decide the island’s future.
The statement came in response to renewed remarks by USA President Donald Trump about taking control of Greenland, made in the days after Washington’s military operation in Venezuela. The signatories — the leaders of France, Germany, Italy, Poland, Spain, the United Kingdom and Denmark — framed the issue as both a matter of international law and Arctic security.
What the joint statement says about Greenland sovereignty
The joint text, released by Denmark’s Prime Minister (statsministeren) Mette Frederiksen alongside France’s President Emmanuel Macron, Germany’s Chancellor Friedrich Merz, Italy’s Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni, Poland’s Prime Minister Donald Tusk, Spain’s Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez and UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer, delivers two central messages.
First, it states that Greenland “belongs to its people”, explicitly rejecting any external claim of ownership. Second, it adds that it is “for Denmark and Greenland, and them only, to decide on matters” concerning the relationship between Copenhagen and Nuuk.
In practical terms, the statement reinforces the view that Greenland’s constitutional future — including any possible change in status within the Danish Realm (Rigsfællesskabet) — must be decided through Greenlandic and Danish institutions, not through pressure from outside governments.
Why leaders invoked NATO and the UN Charter
The signatories linked Greenland directly to Europe’s security priorities. They described Arctic security as “a key priority for Europe” and “critical for international and transatlantic security”, arguing that stability in the High North depends on respecting the principles of the UN Charter, including sovereignty, territorial integrity and the inviolability of borders.
The statement also underlined that the Kingdom of Denmark — including Greenland — is part of NATO, and that security in the Arctic should therefore be pursued collectively with allies, including the USA. The message is aimed at preventing Greenland from becoming a theatre of intra-alliance confrontation at a moment when NATO countries are already increasing their presence and investment in the region.
The 1951 defence agreement and the Denmark–Greenland–USA triangle
A key paragraph stresses that the USA remains “an essential partner” in Arctic security, not only through NATO but also via the 1951 defence agreement between the Kingdom of Denmark and the USA.
The reference is intended to show that Washington already has established channels and legal frameworks for defence cooperation in Greenland, and that any further expansion of activities should be negotiated within existing agreements — rather than framed as a question of sovereignty.
What Trump has said since the Venezuela operation
Trump’s latest remarks about Greenland revived a debate that has periodically surfaced in transatlantic politics, but the timing — immediately after the Venezuela operation — has sharpened European sensitivities.
In recent days, Danish and Greenlandic leaders have publicly rejected the idea that Greenland could be annexed or placed under another government’s control. Greenland’s Prime Minister (Naalakkersuisut-formand) Jens-Frederik Nielsen has described the rhetoric as unacceptable and has repeated that the territory is not for sale.
What this means for Arctic security and European cohesion
The joint statement is a diplomatic signal in two directions at once. Towards Washington, it sets a clear boundary: security cooperation is welcome, sovereignty claims are not. Towards Europe, it underlines that Greenland is not only a Danish issue but a test of European cohesion on the rule-based order.
If the dispute escalates, it could force NATO and European governments to confront an uncomfortable scenario: how to manage deterrence in the Arctic while limiting political pressure and signalling discipline inside the alliance.
For Denmark and Greenland, the episode is also likely to accelerate debates already underway about self-government, independence options and external influence in the Arctic — with European partners now making clear, in unusually direct language, that the decision belongs in Nuuk and Copenhagen, not elsewhere.
