“Confidence is broken with the United States”-L’Express

Tension does not descend between the United States and Denmark, however one of its most loyal European allies for decades. While Donald Trump reiterated his desire to incorporate Greenland into the United States, a territory part of the Nordic kingdom, his vice-president, JD Vance, went this Friday, March 28, with his wife, on the American basis of Pittufik, in the northwest of this coveted island. “Confidence is broken with the United States,” said Flemming Splidsboel Hansen, of the Danish Institute for International Studies (DIIS).

L’Express: What do you think of JD Vance’s trip to Greenland?

Flemming Splidsboel Hansen: The vice-president’s wife, Usha Vance, was first to go to Greenland for what was presented as a private trip. Because of the pressure, especially local, this visit was canceled for the benefit of a JD Vance trip to Pittufik, where there is an American base. Some people see it as a gesture of appeasement, but this is not my case. Because it is the first time a vice-president or a president has been traveling to Greenland. I think the Americans say to themselves: as you don’t want it to happen in the gentle way, we’re going to do otherwise. And so the vice-president will move and make serious statements. All this challenges us.

Why do you think the Trump administration is obsessed with Greenland?

Their obsession is explained by their neo-imperialism and their desire to have more territories. Trump said during his inauguration speech that he was going to expand the United States. They say they need it for national security reasons, for world peace. However, the main threat comes from Russia. I therefore see an inadequacy between the way they talk about Greenland, which they say they need it, and their cooperation with Russia. I think this is an invention. The other argument is access to mineral reserves in Greenland, for which there is an economic interest. I think that real motivation is to enlarge the American territory by taking Greenland and maybe even Canada.

Donald Trump said Denmark was a bad ally. Is he right?

Of course, he is wrong. Denmark was a very good ally for the United States and followed it in Afghanistan, Iraq and Syria. We also sent a frigate to the Red Sea. There were even internal debates in Denmark on the fact that we had gone far too far with the Americans. When Trump says that Denmark and other countries are bad allies and adds that he wonders about the fact that they would not support the United States if necessary, it is political manipulation or simply ignorance. Because article 5 of NATO was only used once, to support the United States after the September 11 attacks. Trump’s language is very damaging and undermines NATO and the transatlantic relationship. I don’t think he realizes it perfectly – and he doesn’t care!

What does this change?

In Denmark, we had a plan A, which consists in spending a lot of money to show in the United States that our loves them, so that they love us in return. Now, a plan B has developed, which consists in taking care of ourselves. In the various political circles, I hear more and more that it is necessary to go to plan B. Each party is divided between those who say that an earthquake is underway, that it is an entirely new situation, that we must review our foreign policy, our alliances, much more for the benefit of the European Union for example, and others who say that you have to be patient.

Is confidence with the United States broken?

Yes, I think confidence is broken with the United States. For us, it is mainly linked to Greenland. Every morning, in ministries like that of foreign affairs, in Denmark, people wonder what information they will discover on their phone. Trump still mentioned it before the movement of Vance, ensuring that he should seize this territory. To claim that the journey of the vice-president’s wife or that of five hours of Donald Trump Jr. are intended to discover the beautiful island of Greenland, that is manipulation. There is a political strategy behind this, an operation of influence targeting the population of Greenland, mounted and executed with a great level of cynicism.

How do the Prime Minister put Frederiksen and her government manage this American threat?

There are some parties and politicians to say that they have managed it badly. My personal opinion is that they manage this very well. They also benefit from large political support. They were in restraint, up to the Greenlandic legislative elections on March 11, so as not to be accused of interference. Since then, the government allows itself to be more reactive. Greenland must decide its future alone and choose the time to leave the Kingdom of Denmark. This is what Denmark has always defended with Donald Trump: Greenland goes to the Greenlanders. Now the Americans say that if it is decided not in Copenhagen, but in Nuuk. So they put pressure on Nuuk. Greenland is in a difficult position, especially since it has not yet formed government.

What is Denmark doing to strengthen its credibility in defense?

We try to advance plan A, which consists in spending more money so that Americans love us! This plan implies telling the Americans that they are right when they say that we have failed, but that now we are going to increase our expenses for our security, to take our share rather than it is the American taxpayer who pays.

What does Denmark change in its approach?

We change a lot. Already, just after the invasion of Ukraine, we have given up our “opt out“(Derogations) in defense within the European Union. NATO is still seen as our main space of defense exchange, but there is concern. We will see what will remain NATO after the next summit. We are now completely engaged in the European Union, which is a big change. We have developed two legs, NATO and the EU. We also threaten us by military means, undermines confidence in the Alliance.

We spend much more money in the defense, but we have a problem to spend fast, because we don’t produce anything, and we must therefore see what to buy, where and to whom. This is a very important challenge because you have to be fast. There are even debates around a “war tax”. We also reshape our army with the opening of conscription to women. It goes from 4 months, which was insufficient, at 11 months.

Could Denmark send troops to Ukraine, as part of the volunteer coalition led by France and the United Kingdom?

Yes, I think we could do it, but it’s not a great debate currently in Denmark. Our general support in Ukraine has always been very high and will continue to be.

Put Frederiksen did not rule out the idea that there are French nuclear weapons on Danish soil …

I don’t think there is something concrete. It was questioned on this point and she said that Denmark was not in a position to reject what was proposed. Politicians did not come across him afterwards, telling him that it was unacceptable. The offer of strategic dialogue was launched by the French president and followed by the Germans. If there was an American nuclear umbrella to resign to that there is no longer to rethink this. It is not a debate in Denmark, but it could resurface. Donald Trump has done a lot of damage in two months, he may continue.