Why Greenland? National Security vs. Global Control in 2026 – The European Financial Review

By Joseph Mazur

Greenland issues. Understanding why is sophisticated by the U.S.’s fixation on proudly owning the island as a substitute of increasing bases and increasing nationwide safety in the Arctic. Pressure, by any means, could possibly be a loss quite than a win if NATO’s existence is at stake and world powers conspire for numerous motives. 

– Donald Trump (NBC interview,
March 30, 2025)

The “do it” in the epigraph refers to his potential plan to take over Greenland, which could possibly be achieved by invasion, a tariff menace, or retribution for not receiving a Nobel Peace Prize (which has no connection to Denmark). Why not buy? In any case, in 1867, the U.S. bought Alaska from Russia for lower than two cents (about 50 cents in in the present day’s foreign money) per acre.

Greenland seizure information appeared to have vanished this month, whereas the federal government’s embarrassments over the persistent Epstein Recordsdata preserve popping up to attract our repeated consideration. A 12 months in the past, after spending a while on ideas of Trump’s alarming message on taking on Greenland, I wrote a chunk suggesting that Canada and Greenland would ultimately grow to be essentially the most liveable areas of the northern hemisphere. “There’ll come a time when rising temperatures will pose existential threats for some nations and switch others into havens of habitation, sources, and fertile soil.” My level then was to recommend that there might be a rush for nations to seize these colder territories to resolve the oncoming local weather change issues. America has its California wildfires, Nevada and Arizona’s insufferable temperatures, and floods will grow to be existential threats to different states in the approaching 50 to 100 years. ^[1] 

There’ll come a time when rising temperatures will pose existential threats for some nations and switch others into havens of habitation, sources, and fertile soil.

I could also be unsuitable about why Donald Trump’s notion of taking on Greenland (a mineral-wealthy autonomous territory in the Kingdom of Denmark), Canada, and the Panama Canal won’t be too ludicrous. It might sound too wild an thought in an period of territory respect. One thought is that such commandeering is not going to occur, a minimum of not by gross sales or invasions. Since there are not any patterns to offer us hints of what he does and what he’ll do, we’re left with one opposing thought that if Greenland is taken by drive, a chaotic imbalance of commerce, a large number of world order, and nuclear expansions would comply with. He doesn’t care about how strain in one hemisphere impacts the opposite. He works by his impulsive feelings and want for energy. With out concrete intelligence methods or wise patterns to comply with, the inevitable end result might be a chaotic and harmful world order. For 80 years – from the tip of WWII to the Russian invasion of Ukraine – essentially the most highly effective nations have been cautious in taking on impartial territories. With local weather-altering circumstances, nonetheless, there’ll come a time when rising temperatures will pose existential threats for some nations and switch others into havens of habitation, sources, and fertile soil.

Outdated makes an attempt of taking Canada

A U.S. takeover of Canada shouldn’t be completely insane. It has been halfheartedly tried earlier than by Congress when a invoice was launched to soak up Canada as a State. In July 1866, throughout President Andrew Jackson’s administration, a invoice was launched in Congress to annex Canada (then British North America) and all its provinces to grow to be states and territories of the USA of America. ^[2] Nonetheless, the Annexation Invoice, because it was labelled, by no means handed the Home of Representatives. It was despatched to committee, however with no vote, it by no means got here to the United Stqtes Senate. It was a invoice that known as for the admission of 4 States, Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Canada East, Canada West, and three Territories, Selkirk, Saskatchewan, and Columbia. It was not meant to be an invasion however quite assumed to be a proposal to take monetary management of these State’s and Territory’s money owed. Not a nasty plan, although there have been undercurrents that raised points with Britain, which had been impartial throughout the U.S. Civil Warfare. So, the Invoice was merely a symbolic assault on Britain.

Once more, a newer try

From the tip of WWI to the start of WWII, the USA had an Atlantic strategic warfare plan known as Warfare Plan Pink (the colour supposedly linked to British Redcoats) that had coaching workouts in logistical combating a warfare with Britain. The plan, accredited by Secretary of Warfare Patrick J. Hurley and Secretary of the Navy Charles Francis Adams III, composed a marketing campaign to invade Canada and occupy strategic ports and railways earlier than British troops might ship reinforcements to the Canadians. These plans had been meant to be explorative and preparatory in case Britain would possibly think about using its Canadian colony bases as a launchpad for annexing the USA. In these years, Britain had the Royal Navy, essentially the most outfitted and superior navy in the world. Such an invasion state of affairs appears ludicrous now, however in these weird instances, the nice powers nonetheless had imperial motives. Britain was an empire for nearly 338 years. It misplaced a colony 135 years earlier, although it remained an empire properly into the twentieth century. The U.S. army plan was to battle a defensive battle to defeat the British by blockading Canadian port provides. In fact, it didn’t occur. It’s nonetheless debatable who would have gained. ^[3]

A 3rd try

Now, Trump is repeating his needs to accumulate Greenland, claiming the necessity for nationwide safety. A look at a map of the Arctic, which connects the shorelines of the Northern Hemisphere, exhibits it to be tactically vital for protection. But the geographical positions of Alaska, Canada, and Greenland embody three-quarters of the Arctic Circle, a robust sufficient encirclement that could possibly be put underneath NATO’s command with elevated surveillance, expanded army bases, and airfields for air, naval, and house operations. The U.S. doesn’t must personal Greenland for any of these strategic belongings, so what can presumably be the motives behind Trump’s needs?

A number of conceivable veiled motives underneath obessions

Potential motive 1: Because the world warms, so will the push to territorially seize these colder territories, not for vacationers however for essentially the most dominant powers that can ultimately really feel their oncoming issues. If I can choose on the USA for a fear, California wildfires, Nevada and Arizona’s insufferable temperatures, and Florida floods will grow to be existential threats to these states in the approaching 50 to 100 years. How will the USA cope? With out severe worldwide authorities commitments to resolve the carbon downside, land between 30° North latitude and 30° South latitude might be hardly liveable, if in any respect match for human habitation. From that viewpoint, Canada and Greenland safe greater than sufficient land mass for migration from southern states. As glaciers alarmingly disappear, these territories underneath ice for millennia have gotten extra liveable.

Motive 2: Greenland shouldn’t be solely a future haven slowly thawing with minerals, oil, and the promise of a extra liveable local weather. Trump’s argument, although, was not about local weather change; he doesn’t care about what is going to occur to the U, S. fifty years from now. He would possibly need Greenland’s minerals, however extra doubtless, he cares extra concerning the strategic place of the world’s largest island, nearly instantly north of Japanese Canada.^[4] If the U.S. can lengthen the bottom it already has, Pituffik, a House Base in Greenland, by a protection settlement with Denmark, it could management the whole Arctic Circle. As could be seen in the aerial photograph under, the U.S. House Base is small in comparison with its measurement throughout World Warfare II.

A U.S. Control of Venezuela and Colombia would encircle Central America and Mexico, a area that is perhaps nearly uninhabitable by the tip of this century. Is Trump fascinated with annexing Canada? That nation is changing into hotter and might be pleasantly comfy later in this century. It has the world’s longest shoreline and a maritime topography that stretches between three huge oceans, a fortune the USA doesn’t have.

Absolutely, a U.S. base that accommodates roughly 150 service members shouldn’t be a menace to Canada, however will probably be as soon as the U.S. begins constructing huge bases in preparation for isolating Canada and taking on the world’s second-largest nation. Why take it over? It’s a pure useful resource dynamo, a number one exporter of minerals comparable to gold and uranium. And allow us to not neglect that it’s the world’s fourth-largest oil producer and holds the world’s third-largest confirmed oil and pure fuel reserves. ^[5] 

Denmark, nonetheless, can be a founding member of NATO. With this U.S. administration threatening to finish NATO (keep in mind Trump’s phone name with Putin) and having Canada surrounded, a floor invasion could possibly be one of many insane army planning schemes. And alongside along with his stroppy head-reeling obsessions, or insanity of cancelling European allies, claiming that they’re a waste of cash, he confronts Greenland. For instance, his letter to Jonas Gahr Støre, the Prime Minister of Norway, argued that since Norway hasn’t gifted him a Nobel Prize, he has permission to assault Greenland. Due to that simplicity, he believes he has permission to dominate half the world, together with Greenland. Not caring concerning the brutal warfare in Ukraine, a direct downside for Europe, he’s fixated on property that is perhaps free to take for actual property potential in Gaza and in Greenland. For his territorial enterprise, he is able to dismantle NATO.

Hmm… May there be one other motive? One with cause?

Motive 3: Let’s think about one other chance. With polar ice caps thawing, Greenland might have new delivery routes by the Northern Sea connecting the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans from the Bering Strait to the coast of Norway. Ahh… Maybe there’s cause right here, in considering that Greenland issues. If we think about the geography in a special means, trying on the azimuthal equal-space projection map under, which exhibits the Arctic Ocean, we see the dominance of the Russian shoreline.

Evaluate that view to what we see in a Mercator map of Russia. The animated map under illustrates the distortion between a Mercator projection (a projection of the Earth onto a cylinder wrapped across the equator) and a planar projection (a projection of the Earth’s floor onto a flat airplane that contacts the globe at a single level). As with all map projections, the styles and sizes are distortions of the true format of Earth’s floor. We will see the projection exaggerations in areas removed from the equator. the nearer to Earth’s poles, the better the distortion.

Greenland issues, and right here is why: Mineral commodity. U.S. Geological surveys present that Greenland has 1.5 million metric tons of confirmed uncommon earth minerals, and a complete potential exceeding 36–38 million tons. That places the island in eighth place in the rating of all international territories, with China rating #1 at ~44 million metric tons, Russia rating quantity 5 with ~3.8 million metric tons, and the U.S. rating quantity 7 with 1.9 million metric tons. Any mining of these minerals is a good distance away; apart from, the U.S. can simply mine its confirmed uncommon-earth minerals that it already has in Alaska.

1. China (~44 Million Metric Tons)
2. Brazil (~21 Million Metric Tons)
3. India (~6.9 Million Metric Tons)
4. Australia (~5.7 Million Metric Tons)
5. Russia (~3.8 Million Metric Tons)
6. Vietnam (~3.5 Million Metric Tons)
7. United States (~1.9 Million Metric Tons)
8. Greenland (~1.5 Million Metric Tons)

We will see from these numbers that China shouldn’t be in it for uncommon-earth minerals, and sure neither is Russia, besides that these minerals could possibly be offered for a really excessive worth. So, what’s the recreation? All potentialities underneath motive 3 threat damaging trans-Atlantic relations, so essentially the most chosen query should be: is it price it? Rebuilding alliances which have been strong for nearly a century would possibly take many years to rebuild. Within the meantime, if there’s a rupture in NATO, Russia would be the winner in a U.S.–Greenland coverage. So, that leaves us with the Arctic Ocean challenge. With out NATO, who will defend Europe as soon as Russian submarine fleets command the shoreline surrounding Western Europe?

–Rebecca Pincus, director of the Wilson Heart’s Polar Institute

There may be an ambiguity

If the U.S.–Greenland coverage, in line with Trump, is for nationwide safety, whereas ignoring the danger of dismantling NATO, the plan is to guard the Americas whereas leaving Europe helpless towards Russia.  

With the ice melting, there might be a mining hunt for vital minerals. Russia could possibly be a menace to Greenland with its newest superior nuclear submarines, because the ocean temperatures rise and pathways open. These submarines might attain the Atlantic from any a part of its 24,140-kilometer Arctic Ocean shoreline, with entry to the Norwegian archipelago. China and Russia are working collectively, presumably, on science in the Arctic, which doesn’t seem like a menace. Nonetheless, after I listened to Heather Conley, a senior fellow on the American Enterprise Institute, talking on International Coverage Stay, I felt one thing was lacking with respect to Arctic safety. With simply 150 army personnel at Pituffik House Base, the U.S. ought to think about extra severe and efficient Arctic safety if Russia’s and China’s presence in the area turns into persistent.

1942: U.S. had agreements with Denmark

1949: NATO  

1951, Bilateral devices with 10,000 U.S. forces.

Nobody is certain about what Trump is in search of; is it nationwide safety? There was speak about a Golden Dome, a nuclear watch, and early warning radar, all to ensure that Greenland might detect Russian submarines, drones, and ships. To make sure, Greenland has all the time performed a strategic function. So why now? And what’s the U.S. Arctic coverage? In his first time period in workplace, there was speak about buying Greenland. Now, in his second time period, the speak has moved to execution.

Greenland says it wants extra surveillance and safety, and European leaders agree. Emmanuel Macron, President of France, shares that view. “Given Russia’s stance in the Far North, China’s financial presence, and the strategic penalties of this rapprochement, we agree on the necessity to strengthen our protection posture in the Arctic,” he mentioned. If there’s a coverage, maybe a NATO plan, it should embody persistent surveillance of the Arctic that’s ready for Russian and Chinese language interferences concerning European and North American territorial waterway points. In that coverage, there ought to be chilly-climate NATO marines prepared as a deterrent towards geopolitical messing. That escalates the danger of half a dozen Chinese language icebreakers in the thawing waters of the Arctic. We don’t management the Arctic, however we see that Russia and China are making ready to navigate sea ground mining. With tensions between Europe and the U.S., the strongmen say, “I’ll take management of our house,” which means half the shoreline of the Arctic that Russia controls with tens of modernized army bases.

A harmful recreation

All of this could possibly be affordable if deliberate the proper means, however Trump’s actual property bullying strategies are a horror present that won’t succeed to his liking. He needs his title on something he can personal or lease – The Kennedy Heart for the Performing Arts, Penn Station, The U.S. Institute of Peace, Washington Dulles Worldwide Airport, the federal government drug plan Trump RX, a rail tunnel that may join New York Metropolis and New Jersey, and even a category of battleships labelled Trump. So, why can’t Greenland grow to be Trump-land? I return to motive quantity 2 for a extra severe, but way more harmful threat. It might all be a part of an intimidation plan, however the AI-generated picture of North and South America, shrouded in an American flag merged with a photograph of a earlier assembly with European leaders, clearly a faux picture, was posted on Trump’s Reality Social account. The picture confirmed a U.S. flag overlaying Canada, Greenland, and Venezuela, suggesting they had been, or might be, U.S. territories. Is it a or self-forfilling prophecy, or expectation? No matter was meant to trigger a rupture with NATO, as tensions mount in trans-Atlantic relations. 

And that brings us to fascinated with that covert December 28^th and 29^th telephone dialog between Trump and Putin. With no transcript, we’ve no notion of what was mentioned and what offers might have been made between the 2 leaders. May they’ve been plotting to partition the world into spheres of affect? You management your house, I management mine? In different phrases, erode the U.S.–Europe alliance and “rupture” NATO.  

German Chancellor Friedrich Merz talking with Wolfgang Ischinger, chairman of the Munich Security Convention, on Feb. 13, 2026, in Munich, Germany mentioned, “Nice energy politics turns away from a world in which growing connectivity interprets into the rule of regulation and peaceable relations between states. Pure sources, applied sciences, and provide chains have gotten bargaining instruments in the zero-sum recreation between main powers. This can be a harmful recreation.” ^[7]

In 2026, at Davos, Switzerland, Mark Carney, the Prime Minister of Canada, used the phrase “rupture” in his second sentence. “At the moment I’ll speak about a rupture in the world order, the tip of a pleasing fiction and the start of a harsh actuality, the place geopolitics, the place the big, predominant energy, geopolitics, is submitted to no limits, no constraints.” ^[8] In that one sentence, he packed an introduction that didn’t want one other. His brilliance demonstrated his energy of clever management by highlighting The Energy of the Powerless, a protest manifesto for understanding and uniting a motion towards a dictatorship written by Vaclav Havel in 1978, a couple of greengrocer and what Havel known as “residing with a lie.”  Now Carney is utilizing Havel’s manifesto to show one thing that has little to do with Havel’s level however very a lot to do with how energy involves the powerless when values and respect for human rights, sustainable improvement and sovereignty holds agency.

Making sense of Trump’s strikes should not doable in the rational world. As it’s with nearly each different Trump provocation, his Greenland hope would possibly merely be the usual magician’s manipulation scheme, to make us look away from what he doesn’t need us to see. With not a lot Greenland information coming from Trump in the previous few weeks, Danish Prime Minister, Mette Frederiksen on February 14^th on the Munich Security Convention mentioned, “Everyone asks us, do we predict it’s over? No, we don’t assume it’s over. We are going to see if we are able to discover a resolution and you may depend on us. You possibly can belief us. We are going to do no matter we are able to.” ^[9]

A brand new sort of realism

– Alexander Stubbm, President of Finland,
Might 29, 2025, College of Tartu, Estonia.

On the The College of Tartu in Estonia, Alexander Stubbm, the President of Finland, offered his ideas about what he considers a “worth-primarily based” realism shaping the way forward for liberal values the requirements to compromise these values with concessions to resolve main international crises, comparable to ending wars, tacking local weather change, and balancing economies, all being “solely doable by dignified and respectful communication primarily based on worldwide diplomacy.” ^[10] By values, he means human rights, freedom of affiliation and speech, the rule of regulation, and the safety of minorities. 

Is it doable to comply with a brand new world order in which values are compromised by the need of avoiding wars of the longer term by dignified and respectful diplomatic communication? It’s a query referred to in a number of of my earlier articles, a realism that rests on the assumption that arguments should be balanced with concessions and settlements that convey peace and prosperity to either side, not essentially for glory or development. Utilized to warfare, the place territory or materials is the aim, the notion of victory shouldn’t be in the successful, however quite the settlement that brings peace and prosperity to either side. “We are going to all the time be at warfare with each other; of the 195 nations that share the sources of this one planet, some might be winners that ultimately grow to be losers, and losers that later grow to be winners in a cycle of energy adjustments that continues till the solar turns into a white dwarf.” ^[11] Heads of State and their advisors ought to perceive a brand new sort of realism, one which mandates compromise to a steadiness stage that advantages all sides. In any other case, by new and previous realism, either side will lose by an sudden disaster.

One final motive

Motive 4: Keep in mind Trump’s labeled communication telephone name with Putin on December twenty eighth and twenty ninth, 2025, presumably a hidden settlement behind a shared curtain of greed and definitely making offers with no look after ethical issues. Trump is seeing and envying a nineteenth-century worldview of kings and emperors trying to find weak territories to subjugate. He sees far-proper events gaining management to alter the world order. His overseas coverage is an bold cuddle with Russia and a discontented thwack at Europe. Russia is loving it whereas the U.S. public is targeted on Trump’s wild each day diversionary leisure information techniques. Russia can now weaken NATO by making a block the place member states are caught between the East and West powers.

Or only a whim

Or … May there be no motive in any respect, however quite a whim of his sparky moments of expansionist desires, disregarding Transatlantic alliances simply earlier than his eyes shut at his Cupboard conferences? Together with his curious intentions, we are able to by no means make sure how the world will react to his antics. The hazard of NATO’s rupture can set the world on fireplace in some ways, however understanding Putin and Russia’s ambitions means the world will tip eastward, benefiting the East and staggering the West. A pleasant Russia and a damaged NATO is Trump’s play to dig for extra reactions that unfold fame for him, irrespective of how dangerous issues will come consequently. ^[12]  

Destroying the East Wing of the White Home was as literal because it was metaphorical. Seeming to seek for issues to interrupt whereas being essentially the most highly effective individual in the world, he noticed NATO, an alliance that has saved Europe protected for over 80 years, and now he’s fracturing it to grow to be “a gaggle of rivals able to undermine each other.”^[13]

With all that’s mentioned, the result’s prone to be a retreat from his threats towards Greenland, although the injury has already been carried out by his flip-flopping ideas about methods to be powerful with out an undergraduate stage of understanding of how diplomacy works. The preliminary Greenland threats could have excessive penalties for Europe, the fraying transatlantic alliance. NATO won’t utterly collapse, however bookmakers in London have a excessive stage of concern about battle and are already growing the chances of a brand new warfare in Europe. If NATO doesn’t utterly collapse, it would certainly be broken or a minimum of be underneath pressure. The betting is on impactful hybrid assaults on vital infrastructure, the European Union Institute for Security Research (EUISS) tells us, “Consultants price this as each the almost definitely state of affairs and one of the crucial impactful. Such an assault wouldn’t goal to defeat Europe militarily however to divide and weaken political resolve: subsea cable sabotage, a chronic energy-grid shutdown, or coordinated disruption throughout digital and transport techniques might paralyze each day life, rattle markets, and set off a disaster of governability.” ^[14] Surveys present that 43 p.c of the UK public believes a brand new world warfare is “doubtless” or “very doubtless” to interrupt out someday in the following 5 years.

It isn’t what Trump needs. With out specializing in sustaining lengthy-time period insurance policies which have labored pragmatically for nearly a century, his overseas coverage might destabilize the world. With no plan, he can convey on the danger of wars, injury markets, disrupt the features of free-market achievements, and ship economies into tailspins.

With out specializing in sustaining lengthy-time period insurance policies which have labored pragmatically for nearly a century, his overseas coverage might destabilize the world.

With Trump ignoring the East, fancying plans for Greenland, and lacking the implications of what might occur in Europe as soon as the warfare in Ukraine ends, or even when a stop-fireplace involves fruition, a ruptured NATO could be his subsequent downside, for he must defend Europe though he cares little concerning the destiny of the European continent. His Greenland antics might simply destroy NATO and convey the Russian battlefield to a wider a part of Europe. With these Greenland tensions, now a warfare with Iran, and a full break with NATO would go away the whole European continent weak to Russian aggression, and but Washington must intervene towards any reprisals. That’s as a result of, as Samuel Charap and Hiski Haukkala wrote in a International Affairs article, “Transatlantic linkages are laborious-wired into the U.S. financial system, and American geopolitical heft could be vastly diminished if NATO collapses. Washington will inevitably be dragged right into a battle with Russia if deterrence fails.” And the French National Strategic Review warns of, “threat of open warfare towards the guts of Europe.” ^[15] And now, Trump is boxed into his personal Iran gambit. It’s a disaster of his personal making, an not possible place to extract a substantial concession that saves the lives of hundreds of protesters.

Annoyed over diplomacy with the Islamic Republic, Trump is hemmed in; on the one aspect, he vowed to rescue the protesters, posting on Reality Social, “HELP IS ON THE WAY”, and on the opposite he began a warfare that isn’t simple to finish with out huge bother for U.S. allies and army bases. With diplomatic impatience, he got here to a choice: Bomb Iran and trigger a disaster throughout the Center East. Bombs at the moment are falling.

The first few have fallen on Tehran, ostensibly to dismantle Iran’s nuclear program and drive regime change. It’s tough to know precisely what he needs to perform: a return to the negotiating desk or one other countless warfare that can shift our focus from different disturbing wars and information. Keep tuned for extra of his day-by-day deal-wandering impulses. No person is aware of how properly this warfare will go.

In regards to the Writer

Joseph Mazur is an Emeritus Professor of Arithmetic at Emerson School’s Marlboro Institute for Liberal Arts & Interdisciplinary Research. He’s a recipient of fellowships from the Guggenheim, Bogliasco, and Rockefeller Foundations, and the writer of eight acclaimed standard nonfiction books. His newest e book is The Clock Mirage: Our Delusion of Measured Time (Yale).

Notes

^[1] https://worldfinancialreview.com/nuclear-weapons-a-final-strive-for-abolition-earlier than-it-is-too-late/

^[2] https://meduza.io/en/function/2026/01/20/trump-s-greenland-gambit-provides-russia-a-historic-alternative-however-might-be-a-blended-blessing-for-putin-consultants-inform-meduzahttps://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Annexation_Bill_of_1866#:~:textual content=apercent20billpercent20introducedpercent20onpercent20July,topercent20committeepercent20andpercent20diedpercent20there.&textual content=%5BPrinter’spercent20No.%2Cpercent20266.&textual content=H.R.,754.&textual content=JULYpercent202percent2Cpercent201866.,andpercent20orderedpercent20topercent20bepercent20printed.&textual content=Bepercent20itpercent20enactedpercent20bypercent20the,thepercent20Unitedpercent20Statespercent20ofpercent20America.

^[3] https://internet.archive.org/internet/20071230145455/http://www.historical past.military.mil/books/70-7_0.htm

^[4] Nathaniel Banks, “H.R. 754, A Invoice for the Admission of the States of Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Canada East, Canada West, and for the Group of the Territories of Selkirk, Saskatchewan, and Columbia,” 39^th Congress, 1^st Session, 2 July 1866.

^[5] https://pure-sources.canada.ca/vitality-sources/fossil-fuels/crude-oil-trade-overview

^[6] https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/oil-and-petroleum-merchandise/the place-our-oil-comes-from.php

^[7] https://www.npr.org/2026/02/16/nx-s1-5716050/us-europe-relations-munich

^[8] https://www.weforum.org/tales/2026/01/davos-2026-special-deal with-by-mark-carney-prime-minister-of-canada/

^[9] https://www.youtube.com/shorts/R9JvQizdOuY

^[10] https://ut.ee/en/content material/alexander-stubb-worth-primarily based-realism-provides-house-overseas-coverage

^[11] https://worldfinancialreview.com/diplomacys-slender-bridges-to-peace/

^[12] https://meduza.io/en/function/2026/01/20/trump-s-greenland-gambit-provides-russia-a-historic-alternative-however-might-be-a-blended-blessing-for-putin-consultants-inform-meduza#:~:textual content=%E2percent80percent9CIt’spercent20thepercent20icingpercent20onpercent20toppercent20ofpercent20the,Betweenpercent20apercent20rockpercent20andpercent20apercent20hardpercent20place.

^[13] https://meduza.io/function/2026/01/23/silnye-strany-mogut-tak-delat

^[14] https://www.iss.europa.eu/publications/commentary/international-dangers-eu-2026-what-are-predominant-battle-threats-europe#:~:textual content=Europe’spercent20toppercent20riskpercent20inpercent202026,belowpercent20NATO’spercent20Articlepercent205percent20threshold.

[15] https://www.foreignaffairs.com/russia/europes-subsequent-warfare-charap-haukkala