Selim Ibraimi- Space in terms of geopolitics and national interest is closely linked. Historically, territorial ambitions have defined geopolitical strategy. For example, the Macedonian Kingdom of Philip and Alexander the Great considered conquering new territories to be essential. It was a means of prestige. They used it to project an image of empire and strength. In the 21st century, this perspective has undergone significant changes. These changes are very defining for the way states act in the international system. Since 1945, the West has been based on the arguments of international law.
Today, much has changed with the arrival of US President Donald Trump in 2025. Developments changed direction after the events in Venezuela on January 3, 2026. There were also tense discussions about the future of Greenland. What does this division look like in public statements in 2026? The transatlantic axis has already been shaken in his second term.
On both sides of the Atlantic, relations have deteriorated. Current events have brought to light whether we really need international law. Recent behavior by states has called into question existing international law. They replace it based on their own needs and interests without any accountability. US President Donald Trump met with oil company executives at the White House on Friday. He said that we will do something about Greenland. This will happen whether they like it or not.
“If we don’t do it, Russia or China will take Greenland, and we will have Russia or China as neighbors.” “I would like to make a deal the easy way. But if we don’t do it the easy way, we will do it the hard way.” “I’m a fan of Denmark… but, you know, the fact that they had a ship there 500 years ago doesn’t mean they own the land.”
“NATO must understand this. I am completely for NATO. I saved NATO. If it weren’t for me, you wouldn’t have NATO now.” In a statement, later Greenlandic Prime Minister Jens-Frederik Nielsen said, among other things, that the leaders of Greenland’s political parties want to once again underline our firm position that the US’s disregard for our country must end.
“We don’t want to be Americans. We don’t want to be Danish. We want to be Greenlanders. Greenland is a country governed in accordance with the Home Rule Act and international law.” “The future of Greenland must be decided by the people of Greenland…” In this regard, Turkish President Recep T. Erdogan said in a speech that the Western world is gradually losing ground, one by one. “We are now in the middle of a ruthless war for division, where those who are not at the table are put on the menu.”
Vice US President JD Vance, in a White House appearance, also said: “We are asking our European friends to take security more seriously. If they don’t, the US is going to have to do something about it.” “Take the US president seriously. Put aside the overreactions by the press and some people in Europe.” What did the president say? “Greenland is really important, not only to America’s missile defense, but to the missile defense of the world.”
“Secondly, we know that there are hostile adversaries who have shown a lot of interest in that particular territory, that particular part of the world,” said the US vice president. Contrary to former partisans, former US Vice President Mike Pence said in an interview with CNN: “Denmark is a NATO ally. Despite some of the comments that have been made in recent days, the fact is that a military attack on a NATO ally would require the activation of the articles, and any NATO ally would be called upon to either withdraw from NATO or come to the defense of that country.” Richard Stengel, former Undersecretary of State in President Barack Obama’s administration, said: “We have a strong 75-year defense agreement with Denmark that gives us exclusive and full military access to Greenland for our security.
During the Cold War, we had 50 bases there; today, we only have 1. However, today, do we need to occupy it for our security? It makes no sense. If it were that vital, we would have more than one base there.” Meanwhile, US Ambassador to NATO Matthew Whitaker stressed that Greenland has a strategic location, critical to US national security and the security of our NATO allies. “The Arctic region is vital to deterring our adversaries and to monitoring the evolving threat landscape.”
Meanwhile, senior European officials have opposed the US administration’s move to invade or buy Greenland. According to Europeans, this would spell the end of NATO. Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni said she continues to disbelieve the hypothesis that the US would launch military action to take control of Greenland. “I believe this is not uk would benefit no one, including the US.” “The message the US wants to send is that it will not accept excessive interference by other foreign actors in an area so strategic for its security.”
Moreover, Denmark has rejected all US claims. Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen said it was completely absurd to talk about the US seizing Greenland. “The US has no right to annex any of the three countries that make up the Danish Kingdom. Greenland and its people have made it clear that they are not for sale and have called on Washington to stop threatening a historically close ally and another people.” According to recent reports, Greenland and Denmark are seeking a high-level meeting with the US to discuss the new crisis. On the other hand, the debate has revealed other data on whether the people of Greenland would agree to become part of the US.
Denmark offers the people of Greenland several benefits that the US is not and will not be able to match, such as free healthcare, free education, strong pensions, paid maternity leave, free childcare, an annual transfer payment of $700 million, etc., etc. Despite the differences, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio has scheduled a meeting with Denmark and Greenland next week. In addition to the EU-US crisis over Greenland, on the other hand, the Coalition for Ukraine has decided to send troops to Ukraine after the ceasefire.
Despite the talks, there are still European disagreements over Ukraine. For example, Slovakia, Hungary, the Czech Republic, and North Macedonia did not attend the Paris Summit. This shows that the cracks are very visible. French President Emmanuel Macron said that, since the Paris Summit, something significant has changed. For the first time, there has been cooperation between the Ukrainians and the “Coalition of the Willing.” Additionally, there is cooperation between the Europeans, the Canadians, and the Americans. The Americans have said exactly what they are prepared to do. They have clearly stated what they are prepared to support. They have also specified the solidarity they are prepared to show. “They will be responsible for monitoring the ceasefire, which includes checking whether the border area is violated or not. These operations will be carried out by the Americans after the peace agreement is reached.
The two crises for the Balkans, those of Greenland and Ukraine, pose significant challenges. They are a dead end for integration into the EU. The crises also hinder NATO membership. From the recent rhetoric in Washington, it is unclear if trust should be placed in the US. This is especially true regarding post-war talks in Ukraine. Some analysts say this situation applies to much more than just talks. In this case, states act outside of their responsibilities. They focus only on national security. This creates a new era of relations. In the Balkans, some will see this as a new order. Others will continue with the old dreams of Euro-integration and NATO.
A lot of war of words and friction about the future of EU-US relations will arise. This will question the existence and credibility of NATO. We do not yet know who will win. In both cases, the opponents of the West and the Balkans are waiting for the best opportunity to act. In such a situation, the integration of the Balkans into the EU will stall. Other processes will also stall. The opportunistic behavior of states in the Balkan region will increase.
The article was written specifically for Portalb.mk. The publication rights are reserved only for Portalb.mk and the author, according to the agreement between them.