Trump threats against Greenland pose new, potentially unprecedented challenge to NATO
This story raises questions about governance, accountability, and American values.
The press is treating Trump’s talk about Greenland as an “existential” NATO crisis, as if a few blunt words automatically equal tanks rolling across Arctic ice. That framing conveniently skips the real question: why does the United States keep footing the bill for a security order that too often ignores American leverage and interests. Conservatives aren’t allergic to alliances.
New Republican Times Editorial Board
U.S. President Donald Trump’s latest threats against Greenland pose a new and potentially unprecedented challenge to NATO, perhaps even an existential one. The alliance is normally focused on external threats, but it could now face an armed confrontation involving its
Original source:
Read at Herald BulletinHow We See It
New Republican Times Editorial Board
The press is treating Trump’s talk about Greenland as an “existential” NATO crisis, as if a few blunt words automatically equal tanks rolling across Arctic ice. That framing conveniently skips the real question: why does the United States keep footing the bill for a security order that too often ignores American leverage and interests.
Conservatives aren’t allergic to alliances. We’re skeptical of alliances that become self-justifying institutions. Greenland sits astride key Arctic routes as Russia and China push north. If Denmark wants unquestioned status quo, it should show how it will meet the moment, not outsource the hard parts to Washington while scolding Washington for bargaining.
The principles are straightforward: national security in the Arctic, public trust in what our commitments buy, fair burden-sharing, and the rule of law in any negotiation. NATO survives when members take threats seriously, including the strategic ones hiding in plain sight.
Commentary written with AI assistance by the New Republican Times Editorial Board.