Europe Admits It Cannot Beat U.S. Militarily In Greenland, But Unveils Plan B

Brussels / Copenhagen : European leaders are preparing a far-reaching contingency response that could include the severing of major economic ties with the United States if Washington attempts to forcibly take control of Greenland, according to officials familiar with high-level discussions in Brussels and several EU capitals.

The warning follows remarks by Belgium’s defence minister, Theo Francken, who acknowledged that Europe would be unable to defeat the United States militarily in Greenland, but stressed that the continent holds powerful non-military weapons. Those tools, officials say, form the backbone of what is now being referred to inside European institutions as “Plan B.”

A Strategic Dispute Turns Into A Transatlantic Test

Greenland, an autonomous territory within the Kingdom of Denmark, occupies a critical strategic position between North America and Europe, anchoring key Arctic air, sea, and missile-warning routes. Renewed signals from Washington reviving the idea of U.S. control over the island have triggered alarm across Europe, where governments see any seizure as a direct breach of sovereignty and international law.

Within Brussels, the issue is no longer viewed solely as a Danish or Greenlandic matter. Officials describe it as a defining test for the credibility of the European Union and for the future of the transatlantic alliance itself.

What Europe’s “Plan B” Would Look Like

According to diplomats and defence officials, Plan B is not a single document but a coordinated escalation framework designed to impose maximum political and economic costs while avoiding direct war.

At its core lies economic retaliation. If the United States were to move militarily or coercively against Greenland, Europe would suspend major trade and investment cooperation, freeze or terminate ongoing negotiations, and consider retaliatory tariffs, financial restrictions, and regulatory barriers. Targeted sanctions against U.S. officials, defence contractors, and entities linked to any operation would also be considered.

While some politicians have spoken of “breaking all economic ties,” officials caution that this would translate in practice into a broad but structured economic disengagement, aimed at inflicting pain while preserving minimal channels necessary for global financial stability.

Diplomatic And Legal Escalation

Alongside economic measures, Europe would move rapidly to diplomatic isolation. Emergency sessions would be sought at international forums to challenge the legality of any U.S. action, arguing that a forced takeover would violate the principles of territorial integrity and self-determination enshrined in international law.

Legal teams in Brussels and Copenhagen are already assessing options to build a formal legal record, intended to frame any seizure of Greenland not as a geopolitical dispute, but as a systemic violation of the rules-based international order.

Military Limits, Deterrence, And NATO’s Role

European defence ministers have been unusually candid about the military imbalance. Officials openly concede that Europe cannot match U.S. power in Greenland through force. Instead, the focus is on deterrence and presence: reinforcing Denmark’s position, increasing Arctic surveillance and patrols, and pressing for stronger coordination within NATO.

Such steps would be defensive rather than confrontational, designed to raise the political and reputational cost of unilateral action rather than to challenge U.S. forces directly.

Intelligence And Security Cooperation At Risk

One of the most sensitive elements of Plan B involves intelligence and security cooperation. European officials acknowledge that, in an extreme scenario, parts of intelligence sharing and defence-industrial collaboration with the United States could be curtailed.

This option is widely described as a last resort, given the deep interdependence of transatlantic security. Its inclusion, however, underlines how seriously the Greenland scenario is being treated in European capitals.

Denmark And Greenland Draw A Red Line

Denmark has made clear that Greenland’s future cannot be decided without its people. Greenland’s government in Nuuk has reiterated its commitment to self-determination and rejected any notion of transfer or coercion. Copenhagen has intensified consultations with EU partners and NATO allies, seeking explicit assurances that Danish sovereignty would be upheld.

High Stakes For Europe And The Alliance

For European leaders, the Greenland crisis extends far beyond the Arctic. It strikes at the credibility of alliances, the limits of power politics among allies, and whether economic interdependence can deter coercion when military options are constrained.

Privately, EU officials say Plan B exists to prevent conflict, by making clear that any attempt to seize Greenland would carry a severe economic, diplomatic, and strategic price. Publicly, they continue to emphasise dialogue and diplomacy, hoping that the threat of escalation will be enough to stop the crisis from crossing a historic threshold.

As one senior European diplomat put it, “This is not about confrontation. It is about ensuring that, even among allies, force is never rewarded.”