Trump letter to Støre is the latest sign of how President Donald Trump is blending personal grievances, alliance politics and the Greenland dispute into a single message aimed at NATO leaders.
On Sunday 19 January 2026, Norway’s Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Støre confirmed he had received the letter after he and Finland’s President Alexander Stubb contacted Trump to urge de-escalation and request a phone call.
How the message was sent through ambassadors
The text appeared in a note addressed to an ambassador, asking that Trump’s message—shared with Støre—be forwarded to another head of government. The format suggests the letter was intended for broader circulation among NATO allies, not only for bilateral communication with Oslo.
“Dear Jonas: Considering your Country decided not to give me the Nobel Peace Prize for having stopped 8 Wars PLUS, I no longer feel an obligation to think purely of Peace, although it will always be predominant, but can now think about what is good and proper for the United States of America. Denmark cannot protect that land from Russia or China, and why do they have a “right of ownership” anyway? There are no written documents, it’s only that a boat landed there hundreds of years ago, but we had boats landing there, also. I have done more for NATO than any other person since its founding, and now, NATO should do something for the United States. The World is not secure unless we have Complete and Total Control of Greenland. Thank you! President DJT”
Støre said the message reached him on Sunday afternoon and was linked to the earlier approach he made together with Stubb.
What Trump wrote to Støre about the Nobel and Greenland
In the letter, Trump claims Norway “decided not to give” him the Nobel Peace Prize for “having stopped 8 wars plus”. He then writes that he no longer feels an obligation to think “purely of peace”, while adding that peace would still be “predominant”.
Trump immediately connects this argument to Greenland, repeating his view that Denmark cannot protect the island from Russia or China and questioning Denmark’s “right of ownership”. The message ends with a demand for “complete and total control of Greenland”, framed as a condition for global security.
The letter also includes a burden-sharing claim: Trump says he has done more for NATO than anyone since its founding and that the Alliance “should do something” for the USA.
Why Støre cannot award the Nobel Peace Prize
A key problem in the letter is institutional. Norway’s government does not award the Nobel Peace Prize.
The decision is made by the Norwegian Nobel Committee, which operates independently of the Norwegian government. This matters because it turns a decision made outside the executive into a grievance aimed at an elected leader.
It also helps explain why the message can read as pressure rather than diplomacy: it treats a Norwegian domestic institution as if it were a tool of government policy.
Why linking the Nobel to Greenland changes the tone
The letter ties together two unrelated issues—an independent Nobel decision and the sovereignty of Greenland, a self-governing territory within the Kingdom of Denmark—as if one could justify the other.
For European governments, that linkage is politically significant. It suggests the Greenland dispute is being framed not only as strategy and security, but also as personal retaliation and leverage.
The wording about no longer feeling bound to think “only about peace” is also notable: it presents peace as a conditional commitment, rather than as a consistent foreign-policy objective.
What analysts say about NATO pressure and tariff risks
Legal and security analysts in Norway have warned that taking military control of a territory would raise far more serious legal questions than previous limited operations, and that it would represent a major escalation in transatlantic relations.
In parallel, Trump’s recent rhetoric has included tariff threats aimed at NATO allies in connection with Greenland—an unusual use of economic tools in a dispute that is fundamentally about sovereignty and alliance politics.
For the Nordics and the EU, the immediate issue is less what is written in one letter than what it signals: whether Washington will keep bundling trade pressure, NATO messaging and Greenland demands into one posture, and how European capitals will coordinate a response without deepening cracks inside the Alliance.
