Archiv: Jens-Frederik Nielsen


25.09.2026 - 00:15 [ TKP.at ]

Was wirklich im Grönland-Deal steht

„Die DĂ€nen haben am meisten gelogen“, sagen Beobachter, die den mittlerweile veröffentlichten Grönland-Deal gelesen haben. Was sich hinter dem Schlagzeilen tatsĂ€chlich verbirgt.

25.09.2026 - 00:11 [ Arnaud Bertrand / X ]

Ok, we now have the actual text of the Greenland deal (
), so we can say how it compares to the existing 1951 arrangement and who, between Trump and Denmark, lied the most in their framing of it.

Long story short – which may surprise some – the Danes lied the most: Trump is pretty much correct in saying that this new deal grants the US control of Greenland.

Let‘s look into what changed compared to the 1951 deal.

1) This is now a permanent arrangement: whereas the existing 1951 deal only lasted as long as NATO existed, this one „does not have an end date and may only be amended by mutual consent.“

It even survives a hypothetical future independence of Greenland: in that event, Denmark and Greenland must ensure that the independent Greenlandic state „affirmatively assume[s] all of the rights and obligations of the Kingdom of Denmark specified in this Agreement.“

2) In the 1951 agreement, the US could set up bases only where both governments agreed, and only on the basis of NATO planning. The new deal locks in three bases: the US can „modernize and expand its activities“ at Pituffik, its only base in Greenland until now, and „shall be allowed to establish an additional Defense Area at Narsarsuaq and Mestersvig.“ Further bases beyond these 3 can be justified by the defense of „the American continent,“ a US interest rather than a NATO one.

Also, quite subtle but this is interesting: Article IV(iii) says that „the United States may establish additional defense areas in Greenland“ and that consultations are then held „to decide implementation details based on mutual agreement.“ What this means is that the principle of a new base is automatically granted and only the implementation details require agreement.

Article VII also gives the US „the right to raise concerns regarding construction, or change of use“ of any building near a US base, after which the parties decide together what to do. Which means that the US has a say over civilian planning around its bases.

3) On US military movement across Greenland, the wording change between the 1951 agreement and this new one is quite funny.

The 1951 text said (Art. V(3)): the US „may enjoy… the right of free access to and movement between the defense areas through Greenland, including territorial waters, by land, air and sea,“ but only „in accordance with general rules mutually agreed upon and issued by the appropriate Danish authority in Greenland.“

The new one says: „the United States of America shall enjoy… the right of free access to and movement between the Defense Areas through Greenland, including the Territorial Waters, by land, air and sea.“

That‘s it: „May“ becomes „shall,“ and the US military movement no longer has to follow rules „issued by the appropriate Danish authority in Greenland.“ The US also gets something new on top: „undersea access to and movement within the Territorial Waters,“ i.e. submarines.

4) Non-NATO exclusion: non-NATO states are barred from military installations or a persistent presence in Greenland unless all three parties approve, giving the US an effective permanent veto. The 1951 deal had no equivalent clause.

5) Investment screening: this is entirely new. „States or investors from a state that is not a member of NATO, a NATO partner, or an EU member state“ (i.e. Russia, China, India, the Gulf States, etc.), „shall not be allowed to have (i) control, (ii) significant influence, or (iii) access to non-public information…within Particularly Sensitive Sectors or Activities in the territory of Greenland (including the Territorial Waters), unless agreed between the Parties.“

Again, it basically means that the US has a permanent veto over who can invest in strategic sectors in Greenland, as far as non-NATO or EU states are concerned.

6) Lastly, in stark contrast with the 1951 deal, the framing of the deal changes significantly: this new deal is largely framed around the US.

The 1951 agreement existed only „for the benefit of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization.“ The new one lists the defense of „the American continent“ as an objective, celebrates „the irreplaceable role“ of the United States military as well as „the United States‘ indispensable historical and ongoing contributions to the security and defense of Greenland,“ and names the establishment of Trump‘s „Golden Dome“ missile defense system as a key goal.

So, to sum up:
– The US secured a permanent military foothold that even an independent Greenland would inherit whether it likes it or not
– The US now has veto power over any non-NATO military presence in Greenland, and over who can invest in its strategic infrastructure and resources (beyond NATO and the EU)
– Denmark signed away its say over the principle of new US bases, with only the right to discuss the „implementation details“
– Danish authorities no longer set the rules for US military movement across the island
– And all of it is now justified by the defense of „the American continent“

I don‘t know in which universe this even remotely „recognizes the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Kingdom and the Greenlandic people‘s right to self-determination,“ as Danish PM Mette Frederiksen put it (stm.dk/en/press/press
).

Yes, the preamble of the text cynically „reaffirms“ Danish sovereignty but, in my book, when you let a foreign country put bases on your soil, move its troops without following your rules and veto who else can come in, in perpetuity, after it spent two years threatening to take you by force, the word for that is anything but „recognized sovereignty“

20.09.2026 - 11:31 [ News18.xom ]

‘Is Trump Getting A Monopoly’: Greenlanders Remain ‘Nervous And Skeptical’, Question New Deal With US

Aka Hansen, a filmmaker and opposition political party member in Nuuk, said she had been told earlier this year to prepare for the worst. She stored five days’ worth of water in case of an American invasion.

“Now, suddenly, everything is fine,“ Hansen said, according to The New York Times. “What happened in between?“

20.09.2026 - 11:27 [ New York Times ]

‘Nervous and Skeptical,’ Greenlanders Question the New Deal With Trump

“My immediate reaction is that it makes me nervous and skeptical,” Ellen Frederiksen, a retired teacher in Narsaq, a town in southern Greenland, said by telephone.

“The way Trump presents it, it sounds as if he is being given a monopoly over Greenland,” she said. “I sincerely hope that isn’t the case.”

20.09.2026 - 10:49 [ Nordisch.info ]

DĂ€nemark jubelt heimlich ĂŒber Grönland-Abkommen mit Trump

Das neue Abkommen zementiere den amerikanischen Zugang aus der alten Verteidigungsvereinbarung von 1951 und stelle klar, dass kein anderer Staat militĂ€rischen Zugang zu Grönland habe, erklĂ€rt Dahl – wobei der Grundkonflikt, ob Grönland zum Königreich DĂ€nemark gehöre und allein das grönlĂ€ndische Volk ĂŒber seine Zukunft entscheide, bestehen bleibe.

Sollte Trump das Abkommen spÀter als Niederlage empfinden, könne er jederzeit neue Forderungen stellen, warnt der Kommentator.

20.09.2026 - 10:38 [ CNN ]

Trump strikes Greenland deal with Denmark after threatening annexation

(Updated 1 hr 49 min ago)

“The United States of America has entered into an Agreement with The Kingdom of Denmark, and Greenland, that gives the United States permanent control over security, and all other needs, in Greenland, completely addressing ALL of our many U.S. concerns. There will be NO COST to the United States!” Trump wrote on Truth Social, going on to call the arrangement “an ‘Infinite Life’ Agreement.”

Trump’s announcement Friday means Greenland remains under Danish control and came ahead of the official text being released. It is unclear how far this agreement differs from an existing 1951 pact between the US and Denmark that allowed broad US military presence in Greenland.

02.02.2026 - 22:35 [ France24.com ]

Trump still seeks to control Greenland, PM warns

Nielsen also praised Denmark as a close partner throughout the crisis.

He has previously stated that if Greenlanders were forced to choose between the US and Denmark, they would choose Denmark. The ‍speech made no mention of independence for Greenland.

28.01.2026 - 09:58 [ Radio France Internationale ]

Macron hosts Denmark and Greenland leaders in show of European unity

France will stage a prominent display of European solidarity on Wednesday, with President Emmanuel Macron welcoming Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen and Greenland’s Prime Minister Jens-Frederik Nielsen to Paris for talks focused on Arctic security and Greenland’s long-term development.

The ÉlysĂ©e Palace said the meeting would take the form of a “working lunch”, during which Macron will “reaffirm European solidarity and France’s support for Denmark, Greenland, their sovereignty and their territorial integrity”.

21.01.2026 - 01:31 [ Yahoo.com ]

Greenland PM Tells People to Prepare for Possible Invasion

Greenland’s government will form a task force consisting of representatives of all relevant local authorities to help people prepare for any disruptions to daily life, Nielsen said. The government is working on distributing new guidelines to the population, including a recommendation to have enough food for five days stored in their homes.

21.01.2026 - 01:23 [ Forbes.com ]

Greenland Prime Minister Says Military Invasion ‘Can’t Be Ruled Out’ (Live Updates)

Greenland Prime Minister Jens-Frederik Nielsen told reporters Tuesday he cannot rule out a U.S. invasion, saying the island’s government will have to start preparing for a possible incursion as troops from Denmark and some NATO countries have arrived in Greenland to bolster its defenses.

17.01.2026 - 20:22 [ Tagesschau.de ]

Demos in mehreren StÀdten: Tausende DÀnen protestieren gegen Trumps Grönland-PlÀne

Tausende DĂ€nen haben in Kopenhagen gegen die von US-PrĂ€sident Donald Trump erhobenen BesitzansprĂŒche auf Grönland protestiert. Sie versammelten sich vor dem Rathaus der dĂ€nischen Hauptstadt, schwenkten dĂ€nische und grönlĂ€ndische Fahnen und riefen „Kalaallit Nunaat!“ – den Namen Grönlands in der Muttersprache.

Auch in anderen dÀnischen StÀdten sowie in der grönlÀndischen Hauptstadt Nuuk finden Proteste statt.

17.01.2026 - 20:17 [ Reuters ]

Protesters rally in Denmark and Greenland against Trump annexation threat

In Greenland‘s capital Nuuk, thousands led by Prime Minister Jens-Frederik Nielsen carried flags and similar banners as they headed for the U.S. consulate chanting „Kalaallit Nunaat“ – the island‘s name in Greenlandic.

“I’ve come here today because I think it’s important to show that Greenland is not for sale. It is not a toy. This is our home,” said Naja Holm, a civil servant.

05.01.2026 - 20:38 [ TheLocal.dk ]

‚That‘s enough‘: Greenland PM calls for end to US annexation threats

The territory‘s prime minister Jens-Frederik Nielsen said „that‘s enough now“ in a response on social media.

„No more pressure. No more insinuations. No more fantasies of annexation,“ Nielsen said on Facebook.

„We are open to dialogue. We are open to discussions. But this must happen through the proper channels and with respect for international law,“ he said

23.12.2025 - 12:32 [ theLocal.dk ]

Denmark summons US ambassador after Trump names Greenland envoy

“We are summoning the US ambassador to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs shortly for two reasons: to clearly state our objection and to request an explanation,” Foreign Minister Lars Lþkke Rasmussen told broadcaster TV2.

LĂžkke said any move that challenges the sovereignty of the Kingdom of Denmark is unacceptable.

„I am deeply angered by the appointment and the statement, which I find totally unacceptable,“ he also said.