EU summit declares relief over Trump Greenland climbdown but keeps coercion tool ready

European Union leaders left their emergency summit in Brussels late on Thursday with a collective sigh of relief. Donald Trump had, in the hours before they convened, withdrawn his threat to impose tariffs on eight member states that opposed his designs on Greenland and declared he had reached the outlines of a deal with NATO on the island's future. The climbdown allowed the Twenty-Seven to claim a diplomatic victory of sorts, yet the final communiqué made clear they have not lowered their guard. The anti-coercion instrument, the EU's most potent trade weapon, remains on standby.

A crisis manufactured and then suspended

The emergency meeting was called after weeks of escalating rhetoric from Washington. Trump had repeatedly stated his intention to acquire Greenland, an autonomous territory of Denmark, citing national security imperatives in the Arctic. He threatened tariffs on Denmark and its European partners if they resisted. The Danish government insisted the island was not for sale. Greenland's prime minister, Jens-Frederik Nielsen, set a red line: violation of sovereignty would not be tolerated, though he left the door open for a "peaceful dialogue" with the United States. By Wednesday, Trump had ruled out the use of force and suggested a deal was in sight following talks with NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte at the World Economic Forum in Davos.

Rutte's subsequent account introduced an immediate note of scepticism. The NATO chief told reporters that sovereignty over Greenland "did not come up" in his conversation with Trump. The discrepancy matters. If the alliance's top official says the territorial question was not discussed, the "outline of a deal" Trump claims may amount to little more than an agreement to keep talking. European diplomats in Brussels noted privately that the US president has a habit of announcing breakthroughs that later dissolve into ambiguity. The EU's decision to keep the anti-coercion instrument armed reflects that experience.

The anti-coercion instrument stays loaded

The instrument, which entered into force in December 2023, allows the EU to retaliate against economic coercion by third countries through restrictions on trade, investment and intellectual property rights. It has never been used. Antonio Costa, president of the European Council, told reporters after the summit that the Union "will defend itself, its member states, its citizens and its companies against any form of coercion, and it has the power and the tools to do so, and will do so if and when necessary." The language was deliberate. By refusing to declare the crisis over, Costa signalled that the EU treats Trump's retreat as tactical rather than strategic.

Not all capitals agree on the narrative. Dave Keating, FRANCE 24's Brussels correspondent, reported that leaders were divided over whether Trump backed down because Europe was tough or because Europe showed willingness to negotiate. That disagreement complicates the next step: if the US president renews his threats, the Twenty-Seven must decide unanimously whether to trigger the instrument. A split over the cause of the climbdown makes unanimity harder to achieve.

Greenland's voice and Denmark's relief

Copenhagen welcomed what it called "positive messages" from Washington. The Danish foreign minister noted Trump's pledge not to use military force. But Nuuk's position remains the most consequential. Nielsen's insistence on a sovereignty red line reflects a growing assertiveness in Greenlandic politics. The territory, population 56,000, controls its own mineral resources and has been courted by both Washington and Beijing for rare earth access. Any future arrangement that bypasses Greenland's consent would face legal and political obstacles in Copenhagen, Brussels and Nuuk alike.

The episode has also revived debate about the EU's Arctic policy. The bloc's 2021 Arctic strategy emphasises climate research, sustainable development and cooperation with partners including the US, Canada and Norway. It does not envisage territorial disputes among allies. Some MEPs argued this week that the Commission should accelerate the strategy's security dimension, including a clearer stance on critical infrastructure and foreign investment in the high north.

Parallel tracks: Ukraine and Gaza

While Brussels focused on Greenland, two other diplomatic tracks unfolded. In Moscow, Steve Witkoff, Trump's special envoy, met Vladimir Putin for four hours late on Wednesday. The Kremlin described the talks as "useful and extremely frank." Yuri Ushakov, Putin's foreign policy aide, said a durable peace in Ukraine would not be possible unless territorial issues were resolved, a formulation that rules out a return to pre-2014 borders. Russian Admiral Igor Kostyukov will lead Moscow's team at three-way security talks with US and Ukrainian negotiators in Abu Dhabi on Friday and Saturday. Kirill Dmitriev, Russia's investment envoy, will meet Witkoff separately on economic issues.

Zelensky, addressing the World Economic Forum earlier on Thursday, delivered a blistering assessment of Europe's role. "Europe looks lost," he said, contrasting the continent's fragmented response to Russia's invasion with what he described as Washington's bold steps in Venezuela and Iran. He nevertheless announced agreements on a new air defence package for Ukraine and confirmed his negotiators were en route to Abu Dhabi. The juxtaposition was striking: a Ukrainian president chastising his European partners while relying on American military support and a US-led diplomatic process that includes direct talks with Moscow.

The Board of Peace and European scepticism

A third strand emerged from Trump's Davos appearances: a proposed "Board of Peace" for Gaza, which the US president said Putin had accepted an invitation to join. The Russian leader later said the invitation was only under consideration. European leaders expressed serious reservations. Costa listed doubts about the board's scope, governance and compatibility with the UN Charter. Kallas, the EU's foreign policy chief, said the bloc could work with the plan only if it were narrowed to Gaza and operated under a UN Security Council mandate. Keir Starmer, the British prime minister, said he had "obvious concerns" about Putin sitting on any peace board while "raining down bombs on Ukraine." Romania's president, Nicușor Dan, said Bucharest was still analysing whether to join.

The Board of Peace proposal illustrates the broader problem. Trump prefers ad hoc, leader-driven initiatives over multilateral institutions. European governments, by contrast, are institutionally wired to the UN, the OSCE and the EU's own foreign policy machinery. The gap in operating methods makes coordination difficult even when objectives overlap. Kallas put it bluntly ahead of the summit: "Disagreements that allies have between them like Europe and America are just benefiting our adversaries who are looking and enjoying the view."

Canada pushes back on a different front

The transatlantic friction was not confined to Europe. At Davos, Trump claimed "Canada lives because of the United States." Mark Carney, sworn in as prime minister only days earlier, used a national address to rebut the assertion directly. "Canada doesn't live because of the United States. Canada thrives because we are Canadian," he said, while acknowledging the "remarkable partnership" between the two countries. The exchange underscored a pattern: Trump's transactional rhetoric tests alliances across the northern hemisphere simultaneously, from the Arctic to the North Atlantic.

The week's events leave a paradox. Europe demonstrated it can act collectively when directly threatened, yet its strategic autonomy remains constrained by dependence on US security guarantees, guarantees that the same US president has shown he is willing to transactionalise. The anti-coercion instrument worked as a deterrent this time. Whether it survives the next test without being fired is the question Brussels cannot yet answer.