The hypocrisy of NATO
President Donald Trump weighs the costs of annexing Greenland as an armada of Danish warships in cahoots with Canadian military forces threatens the coasts of Alaska, Maine, New Hampshire and Massachusetts over who should keep us all safe from Russia.

NATO’s goal of drafting U.S. resources to protect Europe from Russian is drifting toward another goal of European defense AGAINST the United States.

The NATO has no formal mechanisms for expulsion, but the European member nations could conceivably all withdraw from NATO and form a new alliance without the U.S. and allied countries, and that is the threat of ending NATO as we know it.

The Triton serves a vital role in the defence of this highly contested and strategically important area, known as the High North, conducting patrols and returning to harbour in Denmark only for maintenance and to resupply. While not technically an icebreaker, the ship has been specially designed with a double skinned, ice-reinforced hull so that it can break through up to 80 cm of ice. It is also highly manoeuvrable, which is key when operating in Greenland’s narrow ports and waterways. The Triton patrols the west coast of Greenland, monitoring the area for rogue fishing boats or other suspicious ships and submarines, and, when possible, liaising with local communities. … The Triton is one of four Danish patrol vessels deployed in the region at any given time. The ships fall under the Joint Arctic Command (JACO), a Danish operational command based in Nuuk. JACO also oversees Challenger 650 patrol aircraft and the Sirius Dog Sled Patrol – an elite naval unit made up of experienced Danes who patrol the eastern coast of Greenland on dog sleds in two-year rotations.

Danish troops must open fire — even without direct orders — if invaders try to capture Greenland by force, Denmark’s Defense Ministry said as the US weighs military action to annex the land. ¶The ministry confirmed Wednesday that soldiers are required to uphold a Cold War-era rule to “immediately take up the fight” against any foreign force threatening Danish territory, local Berlingske reported.
The rhetoric from Europe is openly hostile. Europe does not view the United States as anything but a source of mercenary soldiers available for hire to NATO. Europe would not be "defending" the United States under any circumstances in the present political climate.

To counter this scenario, European troops, Danish or otherwise, should be positioned in Greenland in advance. This would raise the threshold for presenting Europe with accomplished facts on the ground. ¶Second, clarity about consequences is essential. No one believes a war between the US and the EU is desirable or winnable. ¶But a military move against the EU would have devastating consequences for defence cooperation, markets, and global trust in the United States — not just in an administration, but in the country itself. Preparing a list of consequences is grim but necessary.





