Have Trump and Europe reached a deal on Greenland?

0:00This BBC podcast is supported by ads outside the UK. When you hear the phrase made in China, what do you think? I'm Tristan Redman. And I'm Asma Khalid. And together we host the Global Story podcast from the BBC. And today on our show, we look at the origins and evolution of made in China, because it actually wasn't inevitable. What we're talking about is the world's largest communist nation is at the beating heart of the capitalist system. For more, listen to The Global Story on bbc.com or wherever you get your podcasts.

0:38What is going on with Donald Trump and his determination to take over Greenland? There have been a lot of developments today. He has now dropped his threats to impose tariffs on any countries who oppose his takeover plan. And then he posted this on social media. He said, we've formed the framework of a future deal with respect to Greenland and in fact the entire Arctic region. That sounds like good news. Earlier though, his tone was much more bullish when he had this message for world leaders in Davos. So we want a piece of ice for world protection and they won't give it. We've never asked for anything else and we could have kept that piece of land and we didn't.

1:19So they have a choice. You can say yes and we will be very appreciative or you can say no and we will remember. In this episode, we're going to try and make sense of what this deal could be and what it means for Trump's determination to own Greenland. We recorded this episode in two parts, as you can probably tell, because it does include some breaking news. We'll start with Donald Trump's earlier address to world leaders in Davos. Welcome to AmeriCast. AmeriCast. AmeriCast from BBC News. When Donald Trump calls, they say, yes, sir. Right away, sir. Happy to lick your boot, sir. We are the sickest country in the world.

2:00Oh, dear. Are you worried that billionaires are going to go hungry? Of course the president supports peaceful protests. What a stupid question. Are you still talking about Jeffrey Epstein?

2:16Hello there. It's Sarah in the BBC's bureau in Washington at about quarter past two in the afternoon. Hannes Anthony, right here with Sarah in Washington, D.C. It's too late in the afternoon, I think, for some of our British colleagues to be joining us from what they love to call the worldwide headquarters. So you and I, Anthony, will take it away today talking about, I think, what has to be one of the most eagerly anticipated speeches of Donald Trump's second term so far. It wasn't just us journalists who were on the edge of our seats waiting for this, was it? It was the world leaders, the business leaders and billionaires who are all stacked there in Davos, Switzerland.

2:50and everybody on the edge of their seats waiting to hear what he's really prepared to do, how far he's prepared to go in his pursuit of Greenland. Right. A fraught moment. There was a lot of attention with Donald Trump coming in here because of what he has been saying about Greenland in particular, about NATO and America's alliances with Europe more generally. It had been building to a crescendo over the past weeks. And Tuesday morning, Monday night, Trump fired off a flurry of truth social posts where he shared personal messages from European leaders asking them about Greenland and then also upping the pressure, upping the rhetoric directed at Greenland and expressing his desire, his continued desire to acquire the Denmark territory.

3:43and he left open any kind of meme. So I think people were going into this speech to see, well, does that mean military incursions? We'd already seen Europe send some troops there. That apparently made Trump angry. He kind of lashed out at Europeans saying he didn't know what they were doing, sending these military personnel there. So there was a lot riding on this moment. And I think we were all kind of on the edge of our seats watching him start this speech. Would you like me to say a few words of Greyland? I was going to leave it out of the speech, but I thought I think I would have been reviewed very negatively in World War Two when Denmark fell to Germany after just six hours of fighting and was totally unable to defend either itself or Greenland.

4:30So the United States was then compelled. We did it. We felt an obligation to do it, to send our own forces to hold the Greenland territory and hold it. We did. And then after the war, which we won, we won it big without us. Right now, you'd all be speaking German and a little Japanese, perhaps. After the war, we gave Greenland back to Denmark. How stupid were we to do that? It's the United States alone that can protect this giant mass of land, this giant piece of ice, develop it and improve it and make it so that it's good for Europe and safe for Europe and good for us. And that's the reason I'm seeking immediate negotiations to once again discuss the acquisition of Greenland by the United States.

5:23We probably won't get anything unless I decide to use excessive strength and force where we would be, frankly, unstoppable. But I won't do that. Okay, now everyone's saying, oh, good. That's probably the biggest statement I made because people thought I would use force. I don't have to use force. I don't want to use force. I won't use force. And all we're asking for is to get Greenland, including right title and ownership, because you need the ownership to defend it. You can't defend it on a lease. Number one, legally, it's not defensible that way. Totally. And number two, psychologically, who the hell wants to defend a license agreement or at least, which is a large piece of ice in the middle of the ocean where if there is a war, much of the action will take place on that piece of ice.

6:21Think of it. Those missiles would be flying right over the center of that piece of ice. But the problem with NATO is that we'll be there for them 100 percent. But I'm not sure that they'd be there for us. if we gave them the call. Gentlemen, we are being attacked. We're under attack by such and such a nation. I know them all very well. I'm not sure that they'd be there. I know we'd be there for them. I don't know that they'd be there for us. So with all of the money we expend, with all of the blood, sweat and tears, I don't know that they'd be there for us. So we want a piece of ice for world protection and they won't give it.

7:03We've never asked for anything else and we could have kept that piece of land and we didn't. So they have a choice. You can say yes and we will be very appreciative or you can say no and we will remember. That was a long section there, but I think it gives our AmeriCasters an idea of what it was like to listen to this over an hour long speech where he had a great deal to say about Greenland and there's some big headlines in there saying that he won't use force for instance but the thing that really struck me Anthony, I don't know you might disagree with me, is I felt that this was a cogent and comprehensive case for why America needs to acquire Greenland.

7:44Now you can agree or disagree with the case he was making but it was far more detailed than we'd heard from him before because quite often it's just a kind of off the cuff remark on Air Force One or something isn't it? He says Greenland, yeah, I think we need that and that's about as much as you hear from him. You'd obviously drilled down into the reasons for it a bit here. Right. That was scripted out. Clearly, they put thought into making the case to the Europeans there on why this is necessary. We had heard bits and pieces about it. We heard national security before. We had heard mineral rights before.

8:14I think he leaned heavily into the national security component here. It was kind of new hearing him talk about World War II and that the United States essentially had taken over Greenland during World War II because Denmark was invaded in a matter of hours, lost to Nazi Germany, and then that the United States gave back Greenland to Denmark afterwards and that he thought they shouldn't have given it back. That's kind of rewriting history. There was never any actual United States taking over the territory. There were U.S. forces there, but we didn't have ownership of it, so we had nothing to give back.

8:50It always was Denmark's. But but yeah, that part was was pretty well spelled out. Clearly, the I'm not going to use force thing was something that he knew was going to make headlines that was put in there. And he said it to Friday Ways. I don't have to use force. I won't use force. I don't want to use force. All of it kind of, you know, pick which sentence you like the best there. but he also clearly still wants ownership of Greenland and nothing short of that I think is going to satisfy him. The ownership, title and deed of the island, he's speaking about it like a real estate transaction. He's not just going to rent Greenland, he wants to have the title and then he feels like it's truly ours.

9:35I have an idea, let me run it past you and you tell me if you think it's ridiculous. At the White House press conference yesterday, he was asked several questions about Greenland. And one of them was about the fact that the population in Greenland do not want to join America or become American. And what did he think about that? He said, well, when I speak to them, they'll be thrilled about it. Now, of course, in some ways, that's just the sort of thing that Donald Trump says, isn't it? But it did get me thinking, Denmark doesn't want to give it up. He could make a pretty significant financial offer direct to them.

10:07And you might be saying, no, I don't want to be American. Would$100 ,000 make you want to be American? $500 ,000? Would a million dollars persuade you you wanted to be American? Yeah, I've heard that idea floated among Trump supporters in the past that they just have to find the right price and they can convince the small population there of the benefits of joining the United States, even though they're very outspoken now about not wanting that. I guess I suppose in Donald Trump's view, everyone has a price. Or if this is a real estate transaction, which clearly he's coming in this looking at it like a real estate transaction.

10:43If you buy an apartment building, well, the tenants are still going to live there, whether it's owned by one company or another. This is just changing who you send your rent payments to. And maybe there's a better ownership will bring more perks. I think he's seen that in the framework of a real estate developer, which is obviously what his background is. Let's talk a little bit more about the speech and how he was coming across. The thing I really stood out to me was a familiar theme from Donald Trump, which was grievance and resentment. But it was what made me think he's not going to give this one up.

11:18So he was talking about the way that the US doesn't get thanked for providing most of the defence for all of its NATO allies, the amount of money that America spends on defence compared to some of the other countries in the alliance, that America hadn't been thanked for its contribution to Greenland in the Second World War. And this is a common theme with Donald Trump, isn't it? He's not getting the gratitude or the recognition that he thinks he and his country deserves. And that's a very motivating thing for him a lot of the time, isn't it? Grievance. And that was something I thought, he's not going to let this Greenland issue go if it's resentment that's driving him.

11:53Right. It's central to his politics domestically and internationally. It clearly motivates him. And the perception of being slighted or not taken seriously is probably one of the reasons why he ran for president to begin with. And he also feels the same way about maybe these European elite as he does about the American elite that didn't give him the proper respect when he was initially running for president. So, yeah, I could see that driving him a little more. I think we have to point out when he says that the United States was always there for NATO, but NATO has never—he doubts whether NATO would come and support the United States.

12:34It's the one time where the Article 5 of the NATO treaty was invoked, the collective defense component of it was after September 11th, 2001, when the United States was attacked at the World Trade Center. And that was when NATO and NATO countries came to the support of the United States, sending troops to, say, Afghanistan and other places. So it's, again, rewriting history a little bit by saying that NATO has never helped the United States. Although, in all fairness, the United States does shoulder the lion's share of the defense obligations and has since NATO was founded. That comes with benefits as well.

13:14The United States gets to call the shots, by and large. It's an American who generally heads the Supreme Allied Commander of NATO. With that extra burden comes extra influence. But it seems like sometimes Trump wants to lessen some of the burden, but keep all of the influence. And I'm not sure Europe's going to stand for that. Yeah. So what he said in the speech was, we are there for NATO 100 percent. I'm not sure they'd be there for us. So that's exactly as you were saying. And it actually kind of leads us into what I was asking him about yesterday when he did a press conference at the White House.

13:50He turned up to do the press briefing to celebrate it being one year since he was sworn back into office. And it was about NATO, in fact, that I was asking him there.

14:04Yes, blonde, blue. Yes, go ahead, ma 'am. Go ahead. With the blue holding the computer. If a consequence of your determination to take control of Greenland is the ultimate breakup of the NATO alliance, is that a price you're willing to pay? You mean the breakup of the NATO alliance? So I think something's going to happen that's going to be very good for everybody. Nobody's done more for NATO than I have, as I said before, in every way. getting them to go up to five percent of gdp was something that nobody thought was and pay at two percent they weren't paying at five percent they are paying and they're buying a lot of things from us and they're giving them i guess to ukraine that's up to them but they're giving them to whoever they're giving them to but they're buying a lot i think that we will work something out when nato is going to be very happy blonde blue holding the computer you're going to have that written on your tombstone now, Sarah.

15:09Yes, indeed. The problem was that he kind of points in a general direction in the briefing room and then everybody who could conceivably be the person he was pointing at starts asking their question all at once. He has to try and winnow it down to, you know, and so maybe there was more than one blonde person speaking at the same time and maybe even more than one blonde person wearing a blue top speaking at the same time. And eventually he narrows in on who it is that he wants to ask the question. You've said in the past that you wear bright colors to try to attract his attention. And it has worked in the past.

15:38There you go. It worked again. You're on to something. I think I need to get an orange suit or something for the next time I'm in the press room. Maybe that'll improve my odds of getting called on. Right. Anthony, it's now about 20 to 3 in the East Coast here in America. And the story is changing. There is breaking news. I'm really surprised by this. It says on the BBC website, Trump drops threat of tariffs over Greenland. And he has said he is not going to go ahead with imposing scheduled tariffs that were due to come in effect on the 1st of February, basically on European countries that were supporting Denmark in its opposition to his Greenland plans.

16:14Why? What do you think has changed that means all of a sudden the tariff threat is off the table? Well, he goes on to say he had a very productive meeting with Secretary General of NATO, Mark Ruta. He says they have formed a framework of a future deal with respect to Greenland and a solution, if consummated, will be a great one for the United States of America and all NATO nations. He is sending a delegation to engage in the negotiations that can include Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Vice President J.D. Vance, and Special Envoy Jack of All Trades Steve Whitcoff. So it sounds like a breakthrough.

16:50He doesn't say what it is. He doesn't say the United States has struck a deal to buy Greenland. A framework could be anything. Negotiations ongoing could be anything. But there is a tangible result of this, which is those tariffs, which we were just talking about being potentially damaging, he has taken them off the table.

17:14Okay, we're back and we can bring you a bit more reaction to Donald Trump saying that there is going to be a deal over Greenland. Whilst he was in Davos, he's done a couple of interviews. First off, he sat down with CNBC on Wednesday evening. And during that interview, he said he has the concepts of a deal on Greenland? Well, we have a concept of a deal. I think it's going to be a very good deal for the United States, also for them. And we're going to work together on something having to do with the Arctic as a whole, but also Greenland. And it has to do with the security, great security, strong security, and other things.

17:49Concepts of a plan, the kind of concepts that he had for his healthcare reform as well. And that was back in 2024 during the debate with Kamala Harris, I think, you know, concepts don't necessarily translate into reality. But I mean, it's progress. He's taking the tariffs off. That's a big deal, right? Yeah. So he obviously thinks that there's progress going on, but it was very vague what he said there. He also spoke to a bunch of reporters who essentially doorstepped him in Davos, asking him about the deal. Have a listen to this, and particularly the way he hesitates when he's asked this very pertinent question.

18:24Does it still include the United States having ownership of Greenland like you've said you wanted?

18:31It's a long-term deal. It's the ultimate long-term deal. And I think it puts everybody in a really good position. I think the hesitation with the piano music and playing in the background was the best part of that clip. Clearly, it's not ownership. It's not the United States taking over Greenland and it becoming a U.S. territory and everyone in Greenland becoming U.S. citizens. You think he would be more forthright if that were the case. So this is not the huge win. It would seem that Donald Trump was saying he was going to get, but maybe it's something he's satisfied with. Yeah, and we are still getting some more details coming in and not all of the details have been hammered out yet.

19:11But the New York Times already are reporting that NATO's offering small pockets of Greenland for the US on which to build bases and that those would have sovereignty. But I mean, it was just hours before he was proclaiming that this deal is giving him everything that he needs. He was saying we have to have ownership to defend it. Nobody wants to defend a license agreement or a lease. And now he's saying he has got a very, very long term deal that doesn't sound like ownership. Yeah, earlier when I was thinking through what possibly some sort of an agreement and compromise they could reach on, I did think about the idea of, OK, you know, we have embassies in another country.

19:47that's technically sovereign territory for the country whose embassy it is. So they could do something similar for military bases, which they don't normally do. And that could make this American land. But it's not going to be an American territory, the entirety of Greenland, which I think is what he was envisioning. It's not going to put another star on the American flag. It's not going to get his face on Mount Rushmore as the person who expanded the territory of the United States. So if that is the case, and we don't know yet, but it feels like an exit ramp for Trump where he can save face at least a fig leaf to be able to say, I got what I wanted.

20:25Now I'm going to focus on other things. Yeah. And it was when he sat down with the secretary general of NATO, Mark Rutte, that apparently they came up with this plan. And he gets on very well with Mark Rutte, better than some of the other world leaders who were in Davos there. And afterwards, NATO confirmed that there had been a productive meeting with the president and gave this statement to our partner CBS News, which said the secretary general had a very productive meeting with President Trump during which they discussed the critical significance of security in the Arctic region to all allies, including the United States.

20:59Discussions among NATO allies on the framework the president referenced will focus on ensuring Arctic security through the collective efforts of allies. That's interesting. Especially the seven Arctic allies. Negotiations between Denmark, Greenland and the United States will go forward aimed at ensuring Russia and China never gain a foothold economically or militarily in Greenland. And those discussions that are going forward, I think the president said, are going to be held with J.D. Vance, the vice president, Mark Rubio, the Secretary of State, and the ever-present Steve Witkoff, who seems to do all the president's deals for him.

21:31Right. I think he's heading to Moscow today or tomorrow to do negotiations with Putin. So he's going to pull back away from that and start getting involved in Greenland. Of course, he was instrumental in the negotiations that led to the Gaza peace deal, the Gaza ceasefire. So yeah, he's everywhere. Collective efforts, allies working together. I mean, that's the way things are supposed to work, right? I mean, but then again, And this is the way things could have worked without all of the drama of the past week or two. Yeah. And collective efforts. Tell you why that also strikes a bell with me is I'm sure you've seen, Anthony, reporting there has been around saying that Donald Trump had fundamentally misunderstood what had happened when some of these Arctic allies had sent troops to Greenland last week.

22:15And the purpose was supposed to show that they really are committed to the security of Greenland, that they're prepared to put forces there, that they're definitely prepared to collaborate with the United States in trying to keep Greenland defended. But people have been speculating that Donald Trump got completely the wrong end of the stick and thought that they were sending troops there in order to try and fend off an American invasion, that they were the ones who were taking an oppositional stance. And maybe he's been disabused of that notion now. And that's why we're talking about collective efforts of allies in the Arctic.

22:44Maybe, but the only reason you look at that move, sending troops there as a possible defense against an American invasion, is if you were contemplating an American invasion, If there wasn't any kind of an inkling of an idea and has had to just send the American troops in there and take over the island and have it be a fait accompli, then I guess, you know, you wouldn't see more European troops there as any kind of a problem. Now, the mention here at the end, talking about that negotiations between Denmark and Greenland, the United States going forward, we have also had a statement from the Danish Foreign Minister, Lars Rasmussen, who we talked about before, who was here in Washington just last week.

23:25And he said that the day is ending on a better note than it began. It certainly is. We welcome that President Trump has ruled out to take Greenland by force and pause the trade war with Europe. Now let's sit down and find out how we can address the American security concerns in the Arctic while respecting the red lines of the Kingdom of Denmark. Red lines, which is no ceding of territory. Greenlanders in Denmark get to decide Greenland's face. So, you know, I don't think it sounds like he's going to be negotiating more than what he's already offered. So can Trump call this a victory? Because, I mean, we know that what matters to him possibly even more than national security or cementing his legacy is winning.

24:08He sees each and every battle he goes into as a zero-sum game. He needs to win. And in order for that to happen, somebody needs to lose. Can this look like a victory? You know, he sometimes declares victory even when it's clear he hasn't. I mean, going back to the debate with Kamala Harris, he came out of there saying he won that debate. And I think, if anything, Kamala Harris probably had the upper hand. And but, you know, it's it's, you know, act like you won and then everyone will eventually come around to your view, which is maybe what he's he's doing here. And if he can find some sort of a way of saving face because he had backed himself into a quarter.