Serious questions have been raised after Donald Trump refused to rule out military intervention when voicing his plan to 'take over' Greenland.
The US leader first expressed an interest in attaining the self-governing territory following his second White House inauguration last January, going on to send right-hand man JD Vance to scope Greenland two months later.
Weeks later, Trump, 79, insisted he needed the land - which is technically situated within the Kingdom of Denmark - for 'national security' purposes.
It is also believed, however, that the Republican plans to make good use of Greenland's vast mineral wealth.
Advert
"I think that Greenland is very important for the national security of the United States, Europe, and other parts of the free world," Trump claimed earlier this month, saying in the same breath he has 'no timeline' for Greenland's imminent takeover.
He also admitted he wouldn't rule out using force to take control of the area, a controversial move which Prime Minister of Greenland, Jens Frederik Nielsen, slammed as 'fantasy'.
"When the president of the United States talks about ‘we need Greenland’ and connects us with Venezuela and military intervention, it’s not just wrong," he hit out. "This is so disrespectful. Our country is not an object of superpower rhetoric. We are a people. A land. And democracy.
Advert
"This has to be respected. Especially by close and loyal friends."
More recently, however, Stephen Miller - Trump's Deputy Chief of Staff for Policy and Homeland Security - dodged a number of enquiries from CNN over the potential of his involvement of the army.
"The real question is, by what right does Denmark assert control over Greenland?" Miller responded. "What is the basis of their territorial claim? What is their basis of having Greenland as a colony of Denmark?"
Advert
He continued: "The United States is the power of NATO. For the United States to secure the Arctic region, to protect and defend NATO and NATO interests, obviously Greenland should be part of the United States."
As we say, however, as these unnerving discussions continue taking place in the States, questions have been raised regarding what a full-fledged invasion of Greenland might look like.
What will happen if Trump invades?
A still-valid agreement signed between the US and Denmark in 1951 (later amended in 2004) that recognises the latter's defence of the territory gives us some indication of this. It implies that
Advert
The issue is, however, that Trump could pull out of this at any moment, which could theoretically result in a war between the two NATO nations, with Denmark always willing to intervene if the safety of Greenlandish people comes under threat.
If Trump does choose to invade, he'll have 48 hours to inform US Congress of his plan to commit the country's armed forces to military action, as per Article I of the Constitution.
It's also worth noting that, if he chooses not to officially declare war in this case, the American army can't stay involved in hostilities for more than 60 days. As such, if Trump fails to gain approval from Congress to take Greenland via military force, he would need to end operations in this same timeframe.
Advert
A major concern here is, this wouldn't be the first time that a US leader has violated this constitutional agreement.
How would Greenland be protected?
Greenland has also been covered by a number of other countries in cases of potential military invasions, due to Article 5 of the 1949 North Atlantic Treaty (NAT). This rules states that, if an armed attack takes place against one or more NATO allies in 'Europe or North America', a collective defence will be orchestrated.
"The following article adds that this includes attacks 'on the territory of any of the Parties in Europe or North America… or on the Islands under the jurisdiction of any of the Parties in the North Atlantic area north of the Tropic of Cancer' - i.e. Greenland, which is not part of NATO, or covered by the EU's mutual assistance clause, Article 42.7, which was brought into the Treaty on European Union (TEU) in 2009.
One major flaw in this defence, however, is that Article 5 can't be invoked by one NATO member against another, as it would render the agreement futile.
All 32 members of the alliance would have to unanimously agree that the actions of the perpetrator warrant a response, and in this case, it's highly unlikely that Trump would condemn his own actions.
A country that could seek assistance on Greenland's behalf, however, is Denmark, who is covered by Article 42.7 of the Treaty on European Union, and therefore can ask for help from other EU members if Trump's attack went ahead.
To constitute this, Denmark must fall victim to armed aggression 'on its territory' - in this case, Greenland.
How would the conflict end?
Sadly, it's important to note at this point that, even if they were to rally together, European nations lack the military force required to effectively stand up to the Trump and his administration.
This definitely doesn't mean it's all over for Greenland, given that the EU could use hefty economic leverage against the US, like tariffs and sanctions. It can't yet be determined which countries might inflict this, however, and which nations might side with Trump.
This said, however, a number of other world leaders have already rallied together to release an official statement against Trump's controversial mission.
Signed by the leaders of France, Germany, Italy, Poland, Spain, the United Kingdom, and Denmark, it read: "Greenland belongs to its people. It is for Denmark and Greenland, and them only, to decide on matters concerning Denmark and Greenland.
"Arctic security remains a key priority for Europe and it is critical for international and transatlantic security."
The message continued: "NATO has made clear that the Arctic region is a priority and European allies are stepping up. We and many other allies have increased our presence, activities and investments to keep the Arctic safe and to deter adversaries.
"The Kingdom of Denmark – including Greenland – is part of Nato. Security in the Arctic must therefore be achieved collectively, in conjunction with Nato allies, including the United States, by upholding the principles of the UN Charter, including sovereignty, territorial integrity and the inviolability of borders."
It added: "These are universal principles, and we will not stop defending them.
"The United States is an essential partner in this endeavour, as a Nato ally and through the defence agreement between the Kingdom of Denmark and the United States of 1951."
What almost certainly will occur in the case of Trump's invasion, however, is that NATO will cease to exist as it once did.
As Danish prime minister, Mette Frederiksen recently pointed out, 'if the US chooses to attack another NATO country militarily, then everything stops, including NATO and thus the security that has been established since the end of the Second World War'.
Basically, at this point, the future of Greenland is anyone's guess.
Topics: Donald Trump, US News, Politics, World News, News
Rhianna Benson