BRUSSELS — The European Parliament’s top trade lawmakers failed on Wednesday to reach a common position on the EU-U.S. trade deal, in a move that risks fueling Washington’s impatience against the EU’s slow pace in finally implementing its side of a bargain struck last summer. Negotiations will continue until next week, two people who attended a meeting of the lawmakers told POLITICO. One said that committee vote was penciled in for Feb. 24 and a final plenary vote for March. Both were granted anonymity to discuss the closed-door talks. The meeting failed to clear remaining hurdles regarding the Parliament’s position on the removal of tariffs on U.S. industrial goods and lobsters — a precondition for Washington to reduce its own tariffs on European cars.  Lawmakers from the international trade committee disagreed on the length of a sunset clause which would limit the proposals’ application to 18 to 36 months, as well as whether the EU should withdraw any tariff concessions until a solution is found between Brussels and Washington on the 50 percent tariff the Trump administration has put on steel derivatives. With the EU still processing the shock of Trump’s threats against the territorial sovereignty of Greenland and the Kingdom of Denmark, the liberal Renew group and the Socialists & Democrats are pushing to Trump-proof the deal by inserting suspension clauses into enabling legislation in case the U.S. president turns hostile again.  The center-right European People’s Party has pushed to sign off the deal following calls from EU leaders to unfreeze the implementation of the deal.  Failure to reach an agreement on Wednesday throws into disarray the timeline for parliamentary approval, and further delays the start of negotiations with EU capitals and the European Commission.

Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney publicly backed Kevin Warsh as the next chair of the Federal Reserve on Friday, calling him a “fantastic choice,” in a rare point of alignment amid an escalating U.S.-Canada trade war. “Kevin Warsh is a fantastic choice to lead the world’s most important central bank at this crucial time,” Carney wrote on X shortly after President Donald Trump announced he will nominate the former Fed board member to replace current chair, Jerome Powell. Carney is an experienced central banker himself. He oversaw the Bank of Canada from 2008-2013, briefly overlapping with Warsh’s first tenure as a Fed governor, before leading the Bank of England from 2013-2020. The endorsement stood out as relations between the Trump administration and Canada continue to strain, with Canadian officials warning that Trump’s trade agenda and broader foreign policy are destabilizing both the U.S. and Canadian economies. On Saturday, Trump threatened to impose a 100 percent tariff on Canada if it follows through on a planned trade deal with China. In his latest threat Thursday, he said he would impose a 50 percent tariff on Canadian-made aircrafts after a dispute over aviation certification. “Canada is effectively prohibiting the sale of Gulfstream products in Canada through this very same certification process,” the president wrote on Truth Social. “If, for any reason, this situation is not immediately corrected, I am going to charge Canada a 50% Tariff on any and all Aircraft sold into the United States of America.” Earlier this week, the Bank of Canada said U.S. tariffs are expected to have a “lasting negative impact” on Canada’s economy, citing prolonged uncertainty tied to Trump’s trade policies. “It’s pretty clear that the days of open rules-based trade with the United States are over,” Bank of Canada Gov. Tiff Macklem said. “It’s not a good thing for Americans. It’s not a good thing for Canadians.” In an interview with Reuters on Wednesday, Macklem said Trump’s actions could derail the central bank’s economic forecasts, pointing to Trump’s repeated tariff threats against Canada and other actions abroad, including repeat pressure on Greenland and the capture of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro. “There is unusual potential for a new shock, a new disruption,” he said. “Geopolitical risks are elevated.” Macklem also voiced his support for Powell, telling Reuters that he told Powell in a private conversation that he was “doing a good job under difficult circumstances.” Several global central bank leaders, including Macklem, issued a joint statement earlier this month in support of Powell and the Federal Reserve after the Department of Justice launched a criminal investigation into the Fed chair. They warned that political pressure on central banks could undermine global financial stability. “We stand in full solidarity with the Federal Reserve System and its Chair Jerome H. Powell,” the statement said. “Chair Powell has served with integrity, focused on his mandate and an unwavering commitment to the public interest. To us, he is a respected colleague who is held in the highest regard by all who have worked with him.”

The eurozone economy held up well at the end of 2025, with three of the region’s four largest countries growing by more than expected. Preliminary data from the EU’s statistical office, Eurostat, on Friday showed that the eurozone’s economy expanded by 0.3 percent during the last three months of last year, unchanged from the third quarter. That was better than market expectations of an increase of 0.2 percent. In year-on-year terms, gross domestic product growth slowed by less than feared, to 1.3 percent from 1.4 percent in the previous quarter. GDP was up 0.3 percent in Germany, the region’s biggest economy, and by 0.4 percent and 0.8 percent in Italy and Spain, respectively. The standout underperformer was France, where it was stagnant, held back by a political deadlock that delayed the approval of a budget for 2026. Eurostat’s numbers still showed the scars of the U.S.-driven trade war that overshadowed the economy all through last year. Ireland, whose GDP figures are heavily influenced by trade and financial flows between it and the U.S., registered a sharp contraction of 0.6 percent in the final three months of the year. Eurostat gave no analysis of its numbers, but the figures were likely supported by the fall in global energy prices toward the end of last year. This typically helps European spending power, given that Europe is a net importer of energy.

The Chinese hoped President Donald Trump’s push for Greenland would help them peel Europe away from America. The Finns were desperate to prevent a trade war over the island. And Iceland was furious over a suggestion that it’s next on Trump’s target list — the “52nd state.” A batch of State Department cables obtained by POLITICO expose the deep reverberations of the president’s demands for Greenland as foreign officials vented their frustrations this month with American counterparts. The messages, which have not been previously reported, offer a behind-the-scenes glimpse into the thinking of allies and adversaries about the impact of Trump’s would-be land grab. They highlight a new point of tension in a transatlantic relationship already strained by Russia’s war in Ukraine, fights over tariffs and U.S. criticism of European policies. And they come just as Trump discusses a framework deal that stops short of allowing the U.S. to own Greenland, but which could expand U.S. military and mining activity in the Danish territory. The cables — perhaps most critically — underscore how important the U.S. remains to so many countries in Europe, even if Trump’s behavior is pushing that continent’s leaders to the edge. “Let’s not get a divorce,” Finland’s Foreign Minister Elina Valtonen said, according to one cable, “especially not a messy one.” A cable from the U.S. Embassy in Beijing on Jan. 21 suggests the Chinese government is eager to benefit from Trump’s moves against Greenland. The situation “offers China an opportunity to benefit from European hedging” and could “amplify trans-Atlantic frictions,” U.S. diplomats wrote in laying out the thinking in China. But the cable, which cites media and analysts affiliated with the ruling Chinese Communist Party, also notes that Chinese leadership was aware that a larger U.S. military footprint in Greenland could complicate their goals in the Arctic and “consolidate U.S. military and infrastructure advantages.” Chinese Embassy spokesperson Liu Pengyu didn’t address the content of the cable directly, but said any Chinese actions were in line with international law. “China’s activities in the Arctic are aimed at promoting the peace, stability and sustainable development of the region,” Liu said. Another cable, dated Jan. 20 from the U.S. Embassy in Helsinki, outlined the concern in the Finland foreign minister’s office over Trump’s threats to impose tariffs on European countries that had sent military advisers to Greenland to plan troop exercises. Valtonen came across as eager to calm tensions. She told visiting U.S. lawmakers that the arrival of a few soldiers in Greenland was a “misunderstanding,” according to the cable. Finland had no plans to do anything “against the Americans” and the officers — “a couple of guys” — were already back in Finland, she said. She downplayed European Union threats to retaliate over the threatened tariffs, calling it a negotiating tactic, and said she’d push the EU to “do anything to prevent a trade war.” The Finnish government did not respond to a request for comment. When asked about the cables, the State Department referred to Secretary of State Marco Rubio’s testimony on Wednesday to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. He noted that talks between the U.S., Denmark and Greenland have started, and “will be a regular process,” though he didn’t offer any detail. “We’ve got a little bit of work to do, but I think we’re going to wind up in a good place,” he said. “And I think you’ll hear the same from our colleagues in Europe very shortly.” There was also drama in Iceland after Trump’s nominee for ambassador to that country, Billy Long, joked that Iceland could become the “52nd state” — presumably once Greenland became the 51st — and he would act as governor. Iceland’s Permanent Secretary of State Martin Eyjólfsson summoned U.S. Chargé d’Affaires Erin Sawyer to demand a high-level U.S. apology and tell her that such talk “has no place in international discourse,” according to a Jan. 23 cable from the U.S. Embassy in Reykjavík to Washington. Sawyer told him making Iceland a state was not U.S. policy, according to the cable, and pointed out that Long had apologized for the comments. There was no indication Sawyer delivered a high-level apology from the U.S. government as Iceland had requested. The Icelandic Embassy did not respond to a request for comment. Trump last week walked back months of threats about taking Greenland by force and launching a trade war against NATO allies over the issue. He and NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte reached a “framework of a future deal” on Greenland at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, Trump announced. The proposals Rutte and Trump have discussed include three main elements. One would allow the U.S. to have full sovereignty over its bases in Greenland, along the lines of Britain’s basing rights in Cyprus, according to a European diplomat and another person familiar with the planning. The U.S. would also be allowed to establish more bases, although Denmark would get a veto over where on the Arctic island, according to the person. They, like others interviewed, were granted anonymity to discuss internal planning. The framework includes the possibility of integrating Trump’s Golden Dome defense shield into plans for a framework as well as a NATO mission focused on the Arctic. The proposal would also give the U.S. first right of refusal on natural resource extraction projects. It’s not clear how long it will take to hash out details or bring Greenland and Denmark on board. Both insist that, whatever happens, they will not compromise on sovereignty. Despite that confident rhetoric, Trump’s threats about Greenland have posed an existential threat for NATO, which rarely sees such intra-alliance feuding. Rutte has moved fast in search of a compromise. He has used NATO’s machinery to his advantage, capitalizing on Europe’s eagerness to keep the alliance together to lobby allies in favor of stepping up work on Arctic security. Rutte was “persistent,” one senior NATO diplomat said. The NATO leader, armed with concrete options he could offer Trump, sought to align national positions. As the crisis escalated, he spent “many days” in calls with national security advisers and leaders, including Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen, French President Emmanuel Macron, Italy’s Giorgia Meloni, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, Britain’s Keir Starmer and Trump, according to a person familiar with the calls. His efforts led to the session in Davos, which Trump described as “very productive,” and appeared to defuse a potential NATO eruption. But European officials remain worried about the diplomatic situation and uncertain of what Trump seeks. “What we need right now in NATO is unity,” a European official said, “And what the United States is doing is a huge mistake by raising this Greenland topic.” Nette Nöstlinger in Berlin contributed to this report.

Initial talks between Denmark, the U.S. and Greenland over the Arctic island’s fate “went well” but the dispute is not over, the Danish foreign minister said Thursday.   Lars Løkke Rasmussen and Greenlandic Foreign Minister Vivian Motzfeldt met with U.S. Vice President JD Vance and Secretary of State Marco Rubio in Washington on Jan. 14 and agreed to establish a “working group” to discuss Greenland and Arctic security amid U.S. President Donald Trump’s demands to take over the self-ruling Danish territory. “After that there was a huge derailment,” Rasmussen said, apparently referring to Trump’s threat to impose tariffs on several European countries unless they agreed to hand over Greenland — a threat that he eventually walked back after saying he’d reached a “framework” toward a deal with NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte, the details of which have not been made public. “Things escalated, but now we are back on track,” Rasmussen told reporters at the Foreign Affairs Council in Brussels. The first meeting of the working group on Wednesday “went well and took place in a constructive atmosphere and tone.” “I’m a little more optimistic today than I was a week ago,” he added, but warned the dispute has not been “resolved” and more talks are planned. Trump’s threats to seize Greenland roiled Europe and fractured transatlantic relations, leading to calls from leaders for the EU to become more unified and independent to ensure its own security. France and Germany went so far as to call for the EU to explore deploying its “trade bazooka,” the Anti-Coercion Instrument, before Trump backed down. Rasmussen credited Trump’s climbdown from launching a trade war to a “very strong European signal of solidarity” over Greenland. “It has become clear that the price for going down that path has been too high,” he said.

BRUSSELS — The European Union will step up efforts to diversify away from American liquefied natural gas following U.S. President Donald Trump’s threats to take control of Greenland, EU energy chief Dan Jørgensen said Wednesday. Calling the events of recent week a “clear wake-up call,” Jørgensen said growing geopolitical instability — from Russia’s war in Ukraine to rising tensions with Washington — means the EU can no longer assume energy ties are immune from security shocks. “These are very turbulent times,” Jørgensen told journalists at a briefing in Brussels. “What has made the situation more serious and complex is the strained relationship to the U.S. and the fact that we have an American president that does not exclude using force against Greenland,” he said. The U.S. already supplies more than a quarter of the EU’s gas, up from just 5 percent five years ago, with dependence set to rise further as a total ban on Russian gas takes effect. But Jørgensen said the Commission is now actively seeking alternative suppliers to the U.S. and plans to deepen energy ties with a range of countries in the coming months, including Canada, Qatar and Algeria. “Canada for sure, Qatar, North African countries,” he said, adding that Brussels is also working to secure non-Russian sources of nuclear fuel for member countries that still rely on Moscow. While stressing that Brussels does not want a trade war with Washington, Jørgensen acknowledged mounting concern inside the EU that it risks “replacing one dependency with another” after rapidly pivoting from Russian gas to U.S. LNG following Moscow’s invasion of Ukraine. “It has never been our policy to start trading less with the U.S., and we don’t want trade conflicts,” he said. “But it is also clear that geopolitical turmoil … has been a wake-up call. We have to be able to take care of ourselves.” The commissioner said he had not yet spoken with his U.S. counterpart since Trump’s remarks on Greenland, and said the EU has not set a formal threshold for how much U.S. LNG would be considered too much. For now, American gas remains “essential” to replace Russian supplies, he said.

ABOARD THE PRIME MINISTER’S PLANE TO BEIJING — Keir Starmer rejected his Canadian counterpart’s call for mid-sized countries to band together in the face of unpredictable global powers — and insisted his “common sense” British approach will do just fine. The British prime minister arrives in China Wednesday for a trip aimed at rebooting the U.K.’s relationship with the Asian superpower. He’s the latest Western leader to make the visit — which will include a meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping — after trips by Carney and France’s Emmanuel Macron. Carney used a searing speech at the World Economic Forum last week to warn of the “rupture” caused by “great powers” acting in their own self-interest. While he did not namecheck Donald Trump’s administration, the speech riled the U.S. president, who insisted: “Canada lives because of the United States.” The Canadian PM had called for middle powers to work together to “build something bigger, better, stronger, more just.” Starmer was pressed on those remarks on board his flight to China Tuesday. Asked whether he agreed that the old global order is dead — and whether smaller powers need to team up to push back at the U.S. and China, Starmer defended his own policy of trying to build bridges with Trump, Xi and the European Union all at once. “I’m a pragmatist, a British pragmatist applying common sense, and therefore I’m pleased that we have a good relationship with the U.S. on defense, security, intelligence and on trade and prosperity,” he says. “It’s very important that we maintain that good relationship.” He added: “Equally, we are moving forward with a better relationship with the EU. We had a very good summit last year with 10 strands of agreement. “We’ll have another summit this year with the EU, which I hope will be iterative, as well as following through on what we’ve already agreed. “And I’ve consistently said I’m not choosing between the U.S. and Europe. I’m really glad that the UK has got good relations with both.” Starmer’s government — which faces pressure from opposition parties back home as it re-engages with China — has stressed that it wants to cooperate, compete with and challenge Beijing when necessary, as it bids to build economic ties to aid the sputtering U.K. economy. “Obviously, China is the second biggest economy in the world, one of our biggest trading partners,” the British PM — who is flying with an entourage of British CEOs and business reps — said Tuesday. “And under the last government, we veered from the golden age to the ice age. And what I want to do is follow through on the approach I’ve set out a number of times now … which is a comprehensive and consistent approach to China. “I do think there are opportunities, but obviously we will never compromise national security in taking those opportunities.”

President Donald Trump on Saturday said he would impose a 100 percent tariff on all Canadian imports coming into the U.S. if Canada follows through on a trade deal with China. “If Governor Carney thinks he is going to make Canada a “Drop Off Port” for China to send goods and products into the United States, he is sorely mistaken,” Trump wrote in a post on social media, mockingly calling Prime Minister Mark Carney “Governor,” a nod to the nickname he had for former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau. “China will eat Canada alive, completely devour it, including the destruction of their businesses, social fabric, and general way of life. If Canada makes a deal with China, it will immediately be hit with a 100% Tariff against all Canadian goods and products coming into the U.S.A.” In the midst of Trump wreaking havoc on longstanding allies like Canada through a hefty trade war, Carney has gone elsewhere, announcing last week a “new strategic partnership” between China and Canada. As a part of the deal, Canada will ease the tariffs on Chinese electric vehicles that it imposed in tandem with the U.S. in 2024. In exchange, China will lower retaliatory tariffs on key Canadian agricultural products. Following the announcement of the deal, Trump initially sounded indifferent, saying “that’s what he should be doing,” and that it was “a good thing” for Carney to sign a trade deal with China. Saturday’s threat comes on top of an ongoing tariff dispute between the two nations that began early last year after the U.S. imposed broad tariffs on Canadian imports — 25 percent on many goods and higher rates on some other commodities — under national emergency trade powers. Canada then responded with retaliatory tariffs. A number of these tariffs have remained in place, albeit with exemptions for many products covered by the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement. Earlier this month, Trump said USMCA is something he doesn’t “even think about,” adding that “it expires very shortly and we could have it or not. It wouldn’t matter to me.” Trump’s comments only add to the recent spat between him and his Canadian counterpart. At the World Economic Forum in Davos this past week, Carney delivered a high-profile speech warning that the traditional U.S.-led world order was fracturing and urged middle powers to diversify their alliances and trading relationships. That message — coupled with Canada’s emerging trade engagement with China — prompted a strong reaction from Trump. He claimed “Canada lives because of the United States” and that Ottawa is “ungrateful” for its relationship with Washington — even directly calling out Carney, saying: “Remember that, Mark, the next time you make your statements.” On Friday, Trump publicly withdrew his invitation for Carney to join his Board of Peace initiative, which has garnered lackluster support from European allies. Trump’s threat toward a once essential U.S. ally comes as the president continues joking about Canada becoming the 51st state. It also comes days after Trump’s quest to control Greenland hit a turning point in Davos, showing how this administration treats allies less as partners than as adjacent territory to be pressured, coerced or rhetorically absorbed if they stray from Washington’s preferred path.

BRUSSELS — The European factions who hold different views on dealing with Donald Trump each have a figurehead. Let’s meet them. Their roles are crucial as EU leaders meet in Brussels Thursday evening, hours after the U.S. president said he had formed “the framework of a future deal” on Greenland with NATO chief Mark Rutte. The announcement throws the emergency European Council into uncertainty and will see those around the table trying to get a handle on what has actually been agreed, and how they respond to it. Trump’s declaration that tariffs won’t be imposed on EU countries as part of the spat means it’s unlikely leaders will sign off on a range of planned retaliatory trade measures that had been on the table. However, three officials and diplomats — granted anonymity to speak freely — told POLITICO that the working dinner remains vital for discussing a range of issues affecting relations with the U.S., including Washington’s new push for talks between Russia and Ukraine, as well as its creation of a Gaza Peace Board. European Council President António Costa, who is chairing the meeting, will have to contend with different camps when it comes to how to deal with Trump. Here’s who to watch at the summit (and you can keep up with all the news and analysis on our live blog). THE FIREBRAND: FRENCH PRESIDENT EMMANUEL MACRON Macron has emerged at the helm of a small but growing band of countries that want to take Trump on. In Davos on Tuesday, the French centrist branded the Greenland push as “imperialism or new colonialism” and bemoaned Trump’s “useless aggressivity.” France has consistently pushed for Europe to be less dependent on the U.S., and its arms industry stands to benefit from its call on allies to buy more weaponry made on the continent. Behind the scenes, French diplomats were pushing for the deployment of the ACI, making it clear in no uncertain terms that the bloc will stand up to economic blackmail. But texts published by Trump show that Macron — who once had a warmer relationship with the American president — has tried to continue his charm offensive out of view of the cameras. Macron is backed up by leaders such as Belgium’s Bart De Wever, who has said publicly that “there’s no point in being soft anymore” and he would be prepared for a “trade war” if needed. Spain’s Pedro Sánchez, one of the few socialist leaders in the Council, has also been vocal in his condemnation of Trump. That group will be emboldened by the fact that the White House seemingly backed down in the face of diplomatic and economic pressure over Greenland. The fact European leaders are taking this so seriously and holding emergency talks “was clearly part of changing [Trump’s] mind,” said a senior European diplomat about Thursday’s meeting. THE RELUCTANT SUPPORTER: GERMAN CHANCELLOR FRIEDRICH MERZ Despite Berlin’s fragile governing coalition initially sending mixed messages about its intentions, Merz appears to be coming around to Macron’s strategy. With his focus firmly on economics, Merz effectively speaks for the countries that would rather not be dragged into fresh rows with Trump but are starting to feel there may be no other option. He has publicly said “we want to avoid any escalation in this dispute, if at all possible,” but vowed “we will of course protect our European interests, as well as our German national interests.” Like many others, Merz has tried charm — sitting awkwardly through an Oval Office meeting with Trump last year as the president brought up Germany’s Nazi past. Now, the chancellor seems resigned to the prospect that more will need to be done. In private, German diplomats have joined forces with their French counterparts in a rare show of unity to signal they would be ready to support beginning the ACI process. “There is indeed a convergence in the positions between France and Germany, which was previously unthinkable,” said the EU diplomat. THE LITMUS TEST: ITALIAN PRIME MINISTER GIORGIA MELONI All eyes are on Meloni, who has simultaneously carved out a special relationship with Trump while also playing a key role in the development of the EU’s foreign affairs policy as part of an elite group of big economies. When she joins forces with those who want to be more assertive, it’s a significant sign that Trump has probably gone too far. Meloni spoke to the president over the weekend by telephone. “Our goal is not to fight with the Americans,” her foreign minister, Antonio Tajani, told POLITICO after the call, arguing a “win-win” solution could be found. While Meloni is often reluctant to sacrifice her communications channel with the White House, there’s an expectation she will ultimately side with her fellow Europeans. “Meloni understands. She is serious,” a second senior diplomat said, arguing that if her line to Trump fails to produce results, there’s little point continuing to protect it. Another notably cautious figure around the Council table will be Dick Schoof, the prime minister of the Netherlands, who has been reluctant to openly criticize Trump despite his country being one of the targets of the new tariff threats. The Dutch government has emphasized the need to try to work through the Greenland issue without escalation. THE UNDECIDED: POLISH PRIME MINISTER DONALD TUSK A long-standing pro-EU politician, Tusk nevertheless faces a tough moment — navigating public opinion and a Trump-friendly president in Warsaw. Along with the Baltic nations, Poland borders Russia and is dependent on Washington to continue its military role in the region. Three diplomats told POLITICO that this group of countries, while supportive of standing up for European sovereignty, is more hesitant to do anything they think could be seen as an escalation. They will be breathing a sigh of relief that they don’t have to make any major decisions — yet. THE SYMPATHIZER: CZECH PRIME MINISTER ANDREJ BABIŠ The summit is the second Brussels sit-down for billionaire businessman Babiš since he returned to office. He could be key to demonstrating unity. So far, he has joked that he has bought a globe “to see where Greenland is,” and said Trump’s fears about Russia and China are legitimate, but called for a peaceful agreement to preserve NATO. Another leader to keep an eye on is Slovakia’s Robert Fico. He has frequently criticized the EU and dug in his heels over efforts to diversify away from Russia, but ultimately tends to fall in line on major decisions. He met Trump in Mar-a-Lago over the weekend and agreed on joint nuclear power projects, saying he had a special relationship with the president because he is “not a Brussels parrot.” One politician whom those in the room can depend on to oppose almost anything the others might agree on is Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán — a longtime fan of Trump. Diplomats say Budapest is worried by an increasingly unpredictable Washington but, according to one envoy, Orbán “doesn’t want to rock the boat” given he has a critical election test of his own in April. Victor Jack contributed to this report.

urope has spent the last week rummaging around for leverage that would force U.S. President Donald Trump to back off his threats to seize Greenland from Denmark. While Trump now says he will not be imposing planned tariffs on European allies, some politicians think they’ve found the answer if he changes his mind again: boycott the 2026 FIFA World Cup. The quadrennial soccer jamboree, which will be hosted in the U.S., Mexico and Canada this summer, is a major soft-power asset for Trump — and an unprecedented European boycott would diminish the tournament beyond repair. “Leverage is currency with Trump, and he clearly covets the World Cup,” said Adam Hodge, a former National Security Council official during the Biden administration. “Europe’s participation is a piece of leverage Trump would respect and something they could consider using if the transatlantic relationship continues to swirl down the drain.” With Trump’s Greenland ambitions putting the world on edge, key political figures who’ve raised the idea say that any decision on a boycott would — for now, at least — rest with national sport authorities rather than governments. “Decisions on participation in or boycott of major sport events are the sole responsibility of the relevant sports associations, not politicians,” Christiane Schenderlein, Germany’s state secretary for sport, told AFP on Tuesday. The French sport ministry said there are “currently” no government plans for France to boycott. That means, for the moment, a dozen soccer bureaucrats around Europe — representing the countries that have so far qualified for the tournament — have the power to torpedo Trump’s World Cup, a pillar of his second term in office like the 2028 Olympics in Los Angeles. (Another four European countries will be added in spring after the European playoffs are completed.) While they may not be household names, people like Spain’s Rafael Louzán, England’s Debbie Hewitt and the Netherlands’ Frank Paauw may now have more leverage over Trump than the European Commission with its so-called trade bazooka. “I think it is obvious that a World Cup without the European teams would be irrelevant in sports terms — with the exceptions of Brazil and Argentina all the other candidates in a virtual top 10 will be European — and, as a consequence, it would also be a major financial blow to FIFA,” said Miguel Maduro, former chair of FIFA’s Governance Committee. Several of the European soccer chiefs have already shown their willingness to enter the political fray. Norwegian Football Federation president Lise Klaveness has been outspoken on LGBTQ+ issues and the use of migrant labor in preparations for the 2022 World Cup. The Football Association of Ireland pushed to exclude Israel from international competition before the country signed the Gaza peace plan in October. “Football has always been far more than a sport,” Turkish Football Federation President Ibrahim Haciosmanoglu, whose team is still competing for one of the four remaining spots, wrote in an open letter to his fellow federation presidents in September calling for Israel’s removal. Trump attempted Wednesday in Davos to cool tensions over Greenland by denying he would use military force to capture the massive, mineral-rich Arctic island. But during the same speech he firmly reiterated his desire to obtain it and demanded “immediate negotiations” with relevant European leaders toward that goal. Later in the day, in a social media post, Trump said he reached an agreement with NATO on a Greenland framework. His Davos remarks are unlikely to pacify European politicians across the political spectrum who want to see a tougher stance against the White House. “Seriously, can we imagine going to play the World Cup in a country that attacks its ‘neighbors,’ threatens to invade Greenland, destroys international law, wants to torpedo the UN, establishes a fascist and racist militia in its country, attacks the opposition, bans supporters from about 15 countries from attending the tournament, plans to ban all LGBT symbols from stadiums, etc.?” wondered left-wing French lawmaker Eric Coquerel on social media. Influential German conservative Roderich Kiesewetter also told the Augsburger Allgemeine news outlet: “If Donald Trump carries out his threats regarding Greenland and starts a trade war with the EU, I find it hard to imagine European countries participating in the World Cup.” Russia’s World Cup in 2018 faced similar calls for a boycott over the Kremlin’s illegal annexation of Ukraine’s Crimean peninsula, as did Qatar’s 2022 tournament over the Gulf petromonarchy’s dismal human rights record. While neither mooted boycott came to pass — indeed, the World Cup and the Olympics haven’t faced a major diplomatic cold shoulder since retaliatory snubs by countries for the Moscow 1980 and Los Angeles 1984 Summer Olympics — Trump’s seizure of Greenland would put Europe in a position with no recent historical parallel. Neither FIFA, the world governing body that organizes the tournament, nor four national associations contacted by POLITICO immediately responded to requests for comment. Tom Schmidtgen and Ferdinand Knapp contributed to this report.