The center-right European People’s Party is eyeing “better implementation” of the Lisbon Treaty to better prepare the EU for what it sees as historic shifts in the global balance of power involving the U.S., China and Russia, EPP leader Manfred Weber said on Saturday. Speaking at a press conference on the second day of an EPP Leaders Retreat in Zagreb, Weber highlighted the possibility of broadening the use of qualified majority voting in EU decision-making and developing a practical plan for military response if a member state is attacked. Currently EU leaders can use qualified majority voting on most legislative proposals, from energy and climate issues to research and innovation. But common foreign and security policy, EU finances and membership issues, among other areas, need a unified majority. This means that on issues such as sanctions against Russia, one country can block agreement, as happened last summer when Slovakian Prime Minister Robert Fico vetoed a package of EU measures against Moscow — a veto that was eventually lifted. Such power in one country’s hands is something that the EPP would like to change.  As for military solidarity, Article 42.7 of the Lisbon Treaty obliges countries to provide “aid and assistance by all the means in their power” if an EU country is attacked. For Weber, the formulation under European law is stronger than NATO’s Article 5 collective defense commitment. However, he stressed that the EU still lacks a clear operational plan for how the clause would work in practice. Article 42.7 was previously used when France requested that other EU countries make additional contributions to the fight against terrorism, following the Paris terrorist attacks in November 2015.  Such ideas were presented as the party with a biggest grouping in the European Parliament — and therefore the power to shape EU political priorities — presented its strategic focus for 2026, with competitiveness as its main priority.  Keeping the pulse on what matters in 2026  The EPP wants to unleash the bloc’s competitiveness through further cutting red tape, “completing” the EU single market, diversifying supply chains, protecting economic independence and security and promoting innovation including in AI, chips and biotech, among other actions, according to its list 2026 priorities unveiled on Saturday. On defense, the EPP is pushing for a “360-degree” security approach to safeguard Europe against growing geopolitical threats, “addressing state and non-state threats from all directions,” according to the document. The EPP is calling for enhanced European defense capabilities, including a stronger defense market, joint procurement of military equipment, and new strategic initiatives to boost readiness. The party also stressed the need for better protection against cyberattacks and hybrid threats, and robust measures to counter disinformation campaigns targeting EU institutions and societies. On migration and border security, the EPP backs tougher asylum admissibility rules, faster returns, and strengthened external borders, including reinforced Frontex operations and improved digital systems like the Entry/Exit System.  The party also urged a Demographic Strategy for Europe amid the continent’s shrinking and aging population. The text, initiated by Croatian Democratic Union (HDZ), member of the EPP, wants to see demographic considerations integrated into EU economic governance, cohesion funds, and policymaking, while boosting family support, intergenerational solidarity, labor participation, skills development, mobility and managed immigration.  Demographic change is “the most important issue, which is not really intensively discussed in the public discourse,” Weber said. “That’s why we want to highlight this, we want to underline the importance.” 

Czechia will go ahead with the purchase of 24 American F-35 fighter jets but is seeking to improve the conditions of the deal, Czech Prime Minister Andrej Babiš said on Thursday. “We will definitely want to work on this and improve the contract, because the project is at such a stage that it must continue,” Babiš told journalists following a visit to Čáslav air base. “I certainly see a great opportunity to improve the terms of the contract, especially in terms of financing and, of course, in terms of budgeting regarding exchange rate differences,” he added. The deal to purchase the jets was agreed to by Czechia’s previous government, led by Petr Fiala, in 2023. Babiš and his right-wing populist party ANO campaigned on criticism of deal, calling the jets “useless and overpriced,” and vowed to reconsider the agreement. His post-election statements, however, indicated a more pragmatic approach. The decision is likely to come as good news to U.S. President Donald Trump, who pressured Babiš to move ahead with the deal shortly after his inauguration in December. “Andrej knows how to get deals done, and I expected incredible things from him, including on F-35s. Congratulations Andrej!” Trump said in a Dec. 17 post on social media.

BRUSSELS — Europe must build its own military power to survive a more dangerous world and a less reliable U.S., top EU officials warned on Wednesday, sharpening a public split with NATO chief Mark Rutte over the continent’s security future. “We live now in a world where might is right,” European Defense Commissioner Andrius Kubilius said at a conference marking the European Defence Agency’s 21st anniversary. “Our answer to deal with this dangerous world … European independence. European autonomy. More European responsibility for our own defense,” he said, calling for building a “European pillar in NATO.” He was echoed by the EU’s top diplomat and EDA boss Kaja Kallas, who warned that what is happening with the U.S. marks “a structural, not temporary” shift. “NATO needs to become more European to maintain its strength,” she said. That’s a direct challenge to Rutte, who on Monday branded a European arm of NATO an “empty word” given his immediate focus is keeping the U.S. inside the alliance. “If anyone thinks here … that the European Union or Europe as a whole can defend itself without the U.S., keep on dreaming,” Rutte told the European Parliament. But the EU’s top officials are hammering home a very different message: The United States is no longer the lynchpin of European security and the continent has to build its own military potential using its own resources. That’s part of the EDA’s job — to better coordinate the bloc’s military potential. Neither Kallas nor Kubilius mentioned Donald Trump, but it’s clear that the U.S. president’s challenge to the status quo by demanding the annexation of Greenland — a Danish territory — and undercutting NATO’s common defense provisions, are top-of-mind in Brussels. “The biggest change in the fundamental reorientation is going on across the Atlantic: a rethinking that has shaken the transatlantic relationship to its foundation,” Kallas said, adding: “These developments put a severe strain on the international norms, rules and institutions enforcing them that we have built over 80 years. The risk of a full-blown return to coercive power politics, spheres of influence and a world where might makes right, is very real.” She did underline that “The U.S. will remain Europe’s partner and ally,” but added: “Europe needs to adapt to the new realities. Europe is no longer Washington’s primary center of gravity.” That’s why the EU has signed defense cooperation deals with nine countries — the most recent being with India this week. The bloc “must also turbocharge our collaboration with the selected like-minded partners,” Kallas said. The EU also has to respond by revamping its structures to make coordinated action easier; currently a lot of security action needs unanimous consent, giving pro-Kremlin countries like Hungary a veto. “It cannot be that the one country’s veto defines the policy for others,” Kallas said. EU countries will also have to spend more on defense and better coordinate their procurement to avoid wasting money, Kubilius warned. He called the recently approved €150 billion loans-for-weapons Security Action for Europe program a “big bang,” but noted that the bulk of defense spending remains with national capitals. “Most new money for defense will be national, so the temptation will be to spend only national. That would be a big mistake. That would only increase fragmentation,” Kubilius said, warning that without such an effort, EU countries would continue to undermine their defense potential by buying arms from outside the bloc. The U.S. is Europe’s largest weapons supplier, but there is a concerted push to keep more defense spending at home, especially for projects financed by EU money. André Denk, a German military official who is the EDA’s chief executive, warned that the EU “cannot forever rely on U.S intelligence, on their logistic support, on their strategic enablers.” Kallas and Kubilius also underlined that the bloc’s own defense industries need to step up and produce more weapons faster. “Show us your lean and mean side,” said Kallas. The challenges posed by the U.S., Russia and China mean that Europe has to learn to stand up for itself, Kubilius said. “In a world of giants, we too must become giants. A gentle giant that promotes international law and cooperation. But a strong giant all the same.”

BRUSSELS — Mark Rutte has one overriding mission as NATO secretary-general: Stop Donald Trump from blowing up the alliance. That focus is now putting the former Dutch prime minister on a collision course with the very European capitals he once worked alongside — and has left NATO bruised even after he successfully talked Trump down from his threats to annex Greenland. The strain was on full display Monday in the European Parliament, where Rutte bluntly defended the superpower’s primacy in the alliance. “If anyone thinks here … that the European Union or Europe as a whole can defend itself without the U.S., keep on dreaming,” he told lawmakers. “You can’t.” The reaction was swift — and angry. “No, dear Mark Rutte,” France’s Foreign Minister Jean-Noël Barrot shot back on X. “Europeans can and must take charge of their own security. This is the European pillar of NATO.” “It was a disgraceful moment,” said Nathalie Loiseau, a former French Europe minister and now an MEP. “We don’t need a Trump zealot. NATO needs to rebalance between U.S. and European efforts.” Spain’s Nacho Sánchez Amor was even more direct. “Are you the [U.S.] ambassador to [NATO],” the Socialist MEP asked Rutte in a heated exchange, “or the secretary-general representing the alliance and its members?” The clash is also exposing a growing fault line inside NATO: Rutte’s conviction that keeping Trump onside is the only way to keep the alliance intact — and Europe’s rising alarm that this strategy is hollowing it out. As the secretary-general strains to keep the Americans as close as possible, those efforts are opening up a rift with his EU counterparts who are increasingly calling for European security bodies and a continental army beyond NATO.  POLITICO spoke to more than a dozen NATO insiders, diplomats and current and former Rutte colleagues, many of whom were granted anonymity to speak candidly. They described a leader admired as a skilled crisis manager who recently pulled off a win on Greenland, but at the cost of deepening European unease about NATO’s long-term future. But Rutte’s defenders say he has delivered on keeping the alliance together, a task so difficult he cannot always ensure all 32 members of the alliance are satisfied. Officials familiar with how he works also insist he talks more frankly to Trump in private. Still, the Greenland standoff “did a lot of damage,” said one NATO diplomat. Rutte’s approach is a “band-aid” that has “alienated allies,” they added. “We’re an alliance of 32, not a U.S.-plus-31 club.” MORE EQUAL THAN OTHERS Although Rutte insists that he represents all NATO allies, it’s clear that his overriding priority is to keep the United States under Trump from walking away from Europe. That’s opening him to criticism that the focus is now overshadowing the rest of his job. Even the secretary-general’s successful effort in helping to get Trump to back off his Greenland threats at the Jan. 19-23 Davos summit in Switzerland is raising questions about whether it’s just a temporary reprieve and if the U.S. will still attempt to take control of parts of the Arctic island. “What supposed deal have you made with President Trump?” Greens MEP and former Danish Foreign Minister Villy Søvndal asked on Monday. “Did you have a mandate as a secretary-general to negotiate on behalf of Greenland and Denmark?” Rutte denied he went outside his remit. “Of course, I have no mandate to negotiate on behalf of Denmark, so I didn’t and I will not,” he said in Parliament. Lionizing Trump also risks creating a credibility problem for the alliance. Last year, NATO agreed to dramatically step up military spending to 5 percent of GDP by 2035 — a result many in the alliance also see as helping Europe stand on its own two feet. | Pool photo by Nicolas Tucat/EPA NATO is well known for its collective defense commitment — Article 5 — but the alliance is also bound by Articles 2 and 3, which ask countries to promote economic cooperation and mutual rearmament. With his threats to impose tariffs on Europe and seize Greenland, Trump has violated both, the same NATO diplomat said. Adding to that unease, Trump has previously cast doubt on his support for Article 5, and belittled the military commitments of other allies, falsely claiming last week that Europeans had stayed “a little off the front lines” in the U.S.-led war in Afghanistan. Responding to the criticism, a NATO official said: “As secretaries-general before him, NATO Secretary-General Rutte is convinced that our collective security is best served by Europe and North America working together through NATO.” TRUMP CARD AT THE READY Despite that, Rutte has been sticking firmly to his strategy of buttering up Trump in public, insisting he is a positive for the alliance. Last year, NATO agreed to dramatically step up military spending to 5 percent of GDP by 2035 — a result many in the alliance also see as helping Europe stand on its own two feet. The secretary-general on Monday said there was “no way” that would have happened without pressure from the U.S. president. The White House is in full agreement with that characterization. “President Trump has done more for NATO than anyone,” White House Deputy Press Secretary Anna Kelly told POLITICO. “America’s contributions to NATO dwarf that of other countries, and his success in delivering a five percent spending pledge from NATO allies is helping Europe take greater responsibility for its own defense.” Kelly said that Trump has “a great relationship” with Rutte, and then added: “The United States is the only NATO partner who can protect Greenland, and the President is advancing NATO interests in doing so.” His hard-nosed approach is honed by 14 years of managing often fractious coalitions as the Netherlands’ longest-serving prime minister. “He’s anything but an idealist,” said a former colleague. “He’s pragmatic.” Immediately striking up a good rapport with Trump during his first term in the White House, Rutte realized that public flattery was the key to keeping the U.S. president onside. “He can make himself very small and humble to reach his goal,” said Petra de Koning, who wrote a 2020 biography on Rutte. That’s often taken to extremes: The Dutchman described Trump as “daddy” during last year’s NATO summit in The Hague, and lavished praise on him in messages leaked by the U.S. president. But in private, he is more forthright with Trump, according to a person familiar with Rutte’s thinking. “The relationship is trustful,” they said, but “if pushed, he will be direct.” Meanwhile, keeping all 32 NATO members aligned with every decision is “nearly impossible,” the person insisted. Although the deal to get Trump to back off his Greenland threats may have left a bad taste in Europe, NATO wasn’t destroyed. “The reality is, Rutte is delivering,” said a senior NATO diplomat. “Unlike some other leaders, he never doubted the alliance — I chalk it up to experience,” added a second senior alliance diplomat. But keeping Trump sweet risks emboldening the U.S. president to be still bolder in future. “Politicians around the world and in this country ignore Trump’s ego at their peril,” said Stephen Farnsworth, a political scientist at Virginia’s University of Mary Washington. That could also create issues for the alliance down the line. “For the benefit of the alliance, [he’s] sucking up” to Trump, the first NATO diplomat said. “But the question is, where does it end?” Esther Webber and Laura Kayali contributed to this report.

U.S. President Donald Trump said British troops “were among the greatest of all warriors” in the Afghan war, a day after U.K. officials vented outrage at him saying NATO allied troops stayed “a little off the front lines” in Afghanistan. “The GREAT and very BRAVE soldiers of the United Kingdom will always be with the United States of America!” Trump said in a post on his social media Saturday evening. “It’s a bond too strong to ever be broken. The U.K. Military, with tremendous Heart and Soul, is second to none (except for the U.S.A.!).”  Trump’s latest comments came after NATO allies pushed back strongly against his earlier remarks, with British Prime Minister Keir Starmer calling the characterization of U.K. troops in Afghanistan “insulting and frankly appalling.” Starmer spoke on the phone with Trump on Saturday to discuss “the brave and heroic British and American soldiers who fought side by side in Afghanistan,” according to a statement from Downing Street. The leaders also talked about the importance of the U.K.-U.S. relationship, as well as the need for a ceasefire to be reached in Ukraine. The leaders also discussed “the need for bolstered security in the Arctic.”  The past week has seen increased tensions between the U.S. and its NATO allies, as Trump threatened some American partners with tariffs over Greenland. The threat was ultimately walked back once an agreement granting the U.S. access to the island was reached.

Ukrainian and Russian officials will meet next Sunday in Abu Dhabi for a new round of peace talks, U.S. officials said Saturday, after two days of meetings in the city this week failed to produce concrete results. This week’s meetings, the first time all three countries sat face-to-face for talks to try and hash out a ceasefire, touched on economic and military issues, as well as disputes over how much Ukrainian territory Russia will continue to hold after the war, said two U.S. officials. Both spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive diplomatic issues. It’s not clear at this point who from the three governments will be involved in next week’s talks. Hours after the talks broke for the day on Friday, Russia launched its largest aerial assault on Ukraine so far this year, killing civilians and plunging much of the country into darkness during an overnight attack. Attacks on civilian targets and infrastructure have been a hallmark of the Russian reaction to months of talks. They have intensified in recent weeks as Ukraine faces one of its coldest winters in years. “These talks were about deescalation,” one of the U.S. officials said. Despite the continued Russian attacks — and two unprovoked invasions by Russian forces into Ukraine in 2014 and 2022 — the official said: “President Putin said unequivocally that he wants to see a diplomatic settlement of this deal … and, you know, we want to take him at his word.” The meetings in Abu Dhabi were led by Trump’s special envoy Steve Witkoff and his son-in-law Jared Kushner, who met in Switzerland with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy last week before heading to Moscow to huddle with Russian President Vladimir Putin. They capped the week with meetings with both sides, where they were joined by Army Secretary Dan Driscoll and the head of the European Command and NATO forces, Gen. Alexus Grynkewich. One of the big sticking points in the negotiations has been Western security guarantees for Ukraine in any post-war scenario. European countries have pushed for a small troop presence in Ukraine to monitor a ceasefire, with France and Germany leading the push to send troops. President Donald Trump has said the U.S. won’t put boots on the ground in Ukraine but will help. Defense officials have said that American commitment would likely involve satellite and intelligence support, some drone flights to monitor the line of separation, and logistics support. A second U.S. official on Saturday appeared to dismiss those early European commitments, noting it is the American security guarantee that is most critical: “The Coalition of the Willing efforts are nice. They had a couple helicopters and a couple troops and a couple guarantees here and there, but if you speak to the Ukrainians, it’s really the American security guarantees that matter.” The U.S. officials said a big part of this week’s talks focused on economics, as well as who controls Ukraine’s Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant, which is being occupied by Russian forces. There was no agreement, but the push — favored by Moscow — is for Ukraine and Russia to share the electric output from that plant, which is the largest in Europe. “Both parties are starting to envision what they can gain from peace, like the prosperity plan for Ukraine, some of these opportunities for Russia to do business deals with the United States of America,” the second official said. “There’s obviously not a lot of trust right now between Europe and Russia, but we want to create a framework where that can start a new paradigm that can start building trust by showing real de-escalation.” Heading into the talks Witkoff said only one issue — which Zelenskyy later said was territory — was left to be resolved. Russia has demanded it take all of Ukraine’s eastern Donbas region, even parts Ukraine still controls. Ukraine has resisted the demand, given the territory’s strategic importance to the country. Zelenskyy and Trump met this week at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, where Zelenskyy delivered one of his most pessimistic and frustrated speeches to date, lambasting Europe for not taking its own security seriously enough. “Just last year, here in Davos, I ended my speech with the words: ‘Europe needs to know how to defend itself.’ A year has passed. And nothing has changed. We are still in a situation where I must say the same words again,” Zelenskyy said.

The new U.S. defense strategy formally pushes Europe down Washington’s list of priorities while elevating Greenland to a core homeland security concern — suggesting European allies will be expected to shoulder more responsibility for their own defense. “Although Europe remains important, it has a smaller and declining share of global economic power,” the National Defense Strategy, published late Friday, states. “It follows that while the United States will remain engaged in Europe, it must — and will — prioritize defending the U.S. homeland and deterring China.” The strategy also makes clear that in Europe “allies will take the lead” against threats that are “less severe” for the United States but more acute for them, with Washington providing “critical but more limited support.” The document argues that Europe is economically and militarily capable of defending itself, noting that non-U.S. NATO members dwarf Russia in economic scale, and are therefore “strongly positioned to take primary responsibility for Europe’s conventional defense.” At the same time, the strategy places emphasis on Greenland, explicitly listing the Arctic island — alongside the Panama Canal — as terrain the U.S. must secure to protect its homeland interests. The Pentagon says it will provide the president with “credible options to guarantee U.S. military and commercial access to key terrain from the Arctic to South America, especially Greenland,” adding that “we will ensure that the Monroe Doctrine is upheld in our time.” That framing aligns with President Donald Trump’s recent rhetoric on Greenland, which has unsettled European capitals and fueled concern over Washington’s long-term intentions in the Arctic. The defense strategy builds on the Trump administration’s National Security Strategy released in December, which recast the Western Hemisphere — rather than Europe — as the primary arena for defending U.S. security. While the earlier document went further in criticizing Europe’s trajectory, both strategies stress continued engagement paired with a clear expectation that European allies will increasingly take the lead on threats closer to home.

Russia launched its largest aerial assault on Ukraine so far this year overnight, killing civilians and plunging much of the country into darkness — just hours after Ukrainian, Russian and U.S. officials held trilateral peace talks in Abu Dhabi. Ukrainian Foreign Minister Andrii Sybiha said Russian President Vladimir Putin’s forces deliberately attacked while efforts at diplomacy were underway. “Cynically, Putin ordered a brutal massive missile strike against Ukraine right while delegations are meeting in Abu Dhabi to advance the America-led peace process,” Sybiha wrote on X. Moscow’s missiles “hit not only our people, but also the negotiation table,” he added. The Russian strikes hit Kyiv and Kharkiv hardest, Sybiha said, with dozens of ballistic and air-launched missiles and hundreds of drones used. He said Moscow again targeted energy infrastructure and residential areas, calling the assault further evidence that the Kremlin is waging “a genocidal war against civilian people.” Ukraine’s air force said Russia fired more than 370 drones and 21 missiles overnight, while other estimates put the total number of aerial weapons at nearly 400, including hypersonic, ballistic missiles and cruise missiles. Vitaliy Zaichenko, CEO of UkrEnergo, the state energy company, told local media that 80 percent of Ukraine will face emergency power outages on Saturday. Explosions were reported shortly after delegations from Kyiv, Moscow and Washington wrapped up the first round of negotiations in Abu Dhabi. The discussions in Abu Dhabi are expected to continue on Saturday. The talks brought together senior military and intelligence officials from Russia, top diplomats and security officials from Ukraine, and a U.S. delegation that includes President Donald Trump’s envoy Steve Witkoff, his son-in-law Jared Kushner and White House adviser Josh Gruenbaum. Ukraine’s lead negotiator, Rustem Umerov, said the discussions focused on achieving a “dignified and lasting peace,” adding that further meetings were scheduled. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky struck a more cautious tone, saying it was “too early” to draw conclusions and stressing that Russia must demonstrate a genuine willingness to end the war.

Greenlandic organizations said Saturday they had mobilized thousands of demonstrators across Denmark and Greenland to protest U.S. President Donald Trump’s threats to take over the Arctic island, framing the rallies as a defense of democracy and self-determination. The demonstrations were organized by Uagut, the National Organization for Greenlanders in Denmark, together with the citizens initiative “Hands Off Kalaallit Nunaat,” the Joint Association for Greenlandic Local Associations in Denmark (Inuit) and the NGO Mellemfolkeligt Samvirke, according to a joint statement from the groups. In Copenhagen, protesters gathered at City Hall Square chanting “Greenland is not for sale” before marching toward the U.S. Embassy, waving Greenland flags and holding banners reading “Hands off Greenland.” Parallel demonstrations were held in Aarhus, Aalborg and Odense, while a protest in Nuuk, Greenland’s capital, was scheduled for later Saturday, with marchers set to head toward the U.S. consulate, organizers said. “We are demonstrating against American statements and ambitions to annex Greenland,” Camilla Siezing, chairwoman of the Inuit Association, said in a statement. “We demand respect for the Danish Realm and for Greenland’s right to self-determination.” Organizers said the protests were peaceful and open to anyone wishing to show solidarity, and were timed to coincide with the visit of U.S. senators to Denmark amid mounting transatlantic tensions. Trump has repeatedly argued that Greenland is vital to U.S. national security and has refused to rule out coercive measures to acquire it, triggering a diplomatic crisis with Denmark, a NATO ally. Greenland is a self-governing territory within the Kingdom of Denmark, which retains control over defense and foreign policy, while the island’s elected parties broadly support independence but disagree on timing. The protests come days after Denmark and several European allies announced plans to expand their military presence in and around Greenland through increased exercises and deployments, moves officials described as defensive.

Denmark’s top military commander in the Arctic pushed back against claims that Greenland is facing an imminent security threat from Russia or China, undercutting a narrative repeatedly advanced by U.S. President Donald Trump. “No. We don’t see a threat from China or Russia today,” Major General Søren Andersen, commander of Denmark’s Joint Arctic Command in Greenland, said in an interview with the Axel Springer Global Reporters Network, of which POLITICO is a part. “But we look into a potential threat, and that is what we are training for.” Andersen, who has headed the Joint Arctic Command since 2023, stressed that the stepped-up Danish and allied military activity around Greenland is not a response to an immediate danger, but preparation for future contingencies.  Once the war in Ukraine ends, he said, Moscow could redirect military resources to other regions. “I actually expect that we will see Russian resources that are being taken from the theater around Ukraine into other theaters,” Andersen said, pointing to the Baltic Sea and the Arctic region. That assessment has driven Denmark’s decision to expand exercises and invite European allies to operate in and around Greenland under harsh winter conditions, part of what Copenhagen has framed as strengthening NATO’s northern flank. Troops from several European countries have already deployed under Denmark’s Operation Arctic Endurance exercise, which includes air, maritime and land components. The remarks stand in contrast to Trump’s repeated claims that Greenland is under active pressure from Russia and China and his insistence that the island is vital to U.S. national security.  “In the meantime, you have Russian destroyers and submarines, and China destroyers and submarines all over the place,” Trump told reporters on Sunday about his pursuit to make Greenland part of the United States. “We’re not going to let that happen.” Trump has argued Washington cannot rule out the use of force to secure its interests, comments that have alarmed Danish and Greenlandic leaders. Andersen declined to engage directly with those statements, instead emphasizing NATO unity and longstanding cooperation with U.S. forces already stationed at Pituffik Space Base. He also rejected hypothetical scenarios involving conflict between allies, saying he could not envision one NATO country attacking another. Despite rising political tensions with Washington, Andersen said the United States was formally invited to participate in the exercise. “I hope that also that we will have U.S. troops together with German, France or Canadian, or whatever force that will train, because I think we have to do this together.”