TEHRAN – Tensions over Greenland were already high in the weeks before the 2026 Munich Security Conference. President Donald Trump’s repeated statements about acquiring the Arctic island had triggered strong reactions in Denmark and Greenland, raising concerns about sovereignty and trust within the alliance. Although the situation appeared to de-escalate shortly before the conference — with formal talks launched and diplomatic language softening — the underlying divisions between the United States and Europe did not disappear. 

In late January, Washington, Copenhagen, and Nuuk agreed to begin discussions aimed at easing the diplomatic strain. The announcement of talks suggested that both sides were seeking stability rather than confrontation. However, uncertainty remained after Trump publicly stated that a “framework of a future deal” regarding Greenland had been reached. Danish and Greenlandic officials appeared surprised by that claim, and few details were made public. While tensions seemed to cool on the surface, mistrust lingered beneath.

That tension was visible at the 2026 Munich Security. Denmark’s Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen made clear that Trump’s interest in Greenland had not changed. She said his desire was “exactly the same” and described him as “very serious.” Even as she expressed willingness to work with Washington, she firmly stated that sovereignty and territorial integrity are not negotiable. Her message reflected a broader European position: dialogue is possible, but certain principles are untouchable.

Greenland’s Prime Minister Jens-Frederik Nielsen spoke even more directly in Munich. He said Greenlanders “cannot lower their shoulders,” signaling that the sense of pressure had not fully eased. His comment that Greenlanders felt unsafe “for the first time” because of an ally was particularly striking. Even if tensions had recently cooled, the psychological impact of the dispute remained.

The de-escalation did not erase the difference in approach between Washington and European capitals. The United States continues to frame its interest in Greenland as strategic, tied to Arctic security and access to natural resources. European leaders, however, emphasize sovereignty and self-determination. For them, the issue is not only about strategy but about the foundations of the international order and the integrity of alliances.

NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte’s clarification that Greenland’s sovereignty was not under discussion showed an effort to reassure allies and stabilize the situation. Denmark’s Foreign Minister Lars Løkke Rasmussen expressed hope for a constructive solution. These statements signaled that diplomacy is active and that immediate tensions have eased. Yet the fact that such reassurances were necessary at a conference designed to showcase unity highlights how fragile confidence has become.

As a result, even in a moment of partial de-escalation, Greenland continued to overshadow the Munich Security Conference. Instead of presenting a seamless transatlantic front, the gathering revealed differences in tone, priorities, and principles. The crisis may no longer be at its peak, but the disagreement exposed deeper questions about trust and alignment within the alliance.

The events in Munich suggest that while diplomatic efforts have reduced immediate pressure, the broader divide between the United States and Europe remains unresolved. Greenland has become more than a territorial issue. It is now a symbol of shifting transatlantic dynamics — where cooperation continues, but confidence is no longer automatic.