US-Denmark Agreement Could Avert a Transatlantic Crisis Over Greenland

Although details are not yet public, a framework deal mediated by the NATO Secretary General may be taking shape for Greenland, which could ease tensions between Washington and Europe, Peter Siklosi, senior research fellow at the Hungarian Institute of International Affairs, told Magyar Nemzet. The process is in an early stage, but strategic realities may override emotional reactions, the expert pointed out.

Grönland, Nuuk Fotó: AFP

Donald Trump’s statement that the United States would gain "full access" to Greenland under a framework agreement, while Denmark and Greenland consider sovereignty a red line, triggered significant international reactions. According to Peter Siklosi, however, "some kind of agreement has certainly been reached and accepted through the mediation of the NATO Secretary General." At the same time, he emphasized that "the NATO Secretary General is not a sovereign actor, and could have acted at most as a mediator between the Danes, the Europeans, and the Americans."

Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen traveled to Greenland on January 23, 2026 (Photo: AFP)

The researcher pointed out that the details of the agreement are currently not public, and all signs suggest that "it has not been fully hammered out yet." Nevertheless, among the speculations that came to light, he considers a solution similar to the UK-Cyprus model to be realistic. The essence of this model is that "bases under UK sovereignty are located and operated in Cyprus, which legally belong to the United Kingdom."

According to Peter Siklosi, "it is conceivable that a similar model could be implemented in Greenland," where certain military bases would come under US ownership and US sovereignty, while "Greenland as a whole, and of course its population, would not." He recalled that currently one US base operates on the island, but during the Cold War more than a dozen existed, so "we do not know how many bases would be involved, but this could be a viable model."

The expert also drew attention to Greenland's key role in the so-called GIUK gap (Greenland–Iceland–United Kingdom), one of the most important strategic corridors in the North Atlantic region.

This is the sea and air corridor through which the Russian Northern Fleet can reach the Atlantic Ocean, which is why it was of outstanding importance during the Cold War as well,

he recalled. He added that the region’s significance is growing again today, as "Russia has once again become militarily active in the Arctic, and China is more and more openly seeking economic and strategic presence in the Arctic region."

According to the expert, Trump’s withdrawal of tariff threats and his consultations with the NATO Secretary General indicate that "the danger of a potentially serious crisis hanging over Transatlantic relations appears to be receding." At the same time, he stressed that "this can be stated definitively only after the agreement has actually been signed."

Asked whether this development signals a strengthening of transatlantic unity or the success of American pressure, Peter Siklosi replied: "We do not know exactly what Trump’s original goal was." He noted that the US president "often uses the tactic of first asking or demanding something huge, and then later settling for less, which nevertheless is still more than the original situation."

The fact that NATO military planners have been left out of the process is not unusual, the expert said. As he explained, "NATO planners will only be informed much later, since the alliance has its own defense planning procedures." First, the US-Danish agreement must be finalized, signed, and implemented, and only afterward can "the emerging capabilities be integrated into NATO’s defense planning system."

Peter Siklosi described the protests in Denmark and Greenland as natural reactions. In his view, "the style of the US President triggered emotional responses, but over time strategic interests and opportunities will come to prevail." If the bases are indeed established in uninhabited areas, this "could significantly reduce local outrage" and may even "bring new financial resources into local commerce."

Responding to the suggestion that this could even be beneficial for Greenland’s population, the expert said: "We do not know the details, but based on current speculations, if this is done properly, it could even be advantageous."

"On the issue of sovereignty and international law, he emphasized: "If two states agree on such a solution, both parties consent and sign the treaty, then it does not violate international law." At the same time, he sees the role of the European Union as limited, since "Greenland is not a member of the EU, having left in the early 1970s due to fishing disputes." Although the issue was discussed at a meeting of the European Council, "the EU itself is not an actor in this matter, so its ability to intervene is limited."

Cover photo: Nuuk, Greenland (Photo: AFP)