Defending #Greenland in case of military aggression from the USA is often reduced to the complexities of Art. 5 NATO. But there is a similar rule for EU member states, that will be automatically triggered without NATO but demands the same commitments as given to NATO for EU members that are also NATO members.
Article 42(7) of the Treaty on European Union (TEU)
https://www.eeas.europa.eu/eeas/article-427-teu-eus-mutual-assistance-clause_en
@jwildeboer I don't expect any "armed aggression" of the US against Greenland. They already are having their troops there (in accordance with Greenland and Denmark!). There is no president sitting in Greenland they could kidnap. What could be a target or a benefit of an armed aggression?
@maddin @jwildeboer
Yes and that's the scary part:
They'd only have to move some of the troops from an already existing base there to the city center and declare it as occupied/annexed.
Just needs an (unlawful) order (followed).
@grootinside And what will happen next?
Potentially (hopefully?) most Greenlanders would shrug and keep on with their business. Denmark would certainly react and begin talks with the US over the diplomatic channels.
But would that qualify as an "armed aggression"? Would any of the involved parties want that to be seen as an "armed aggression"?
@maddin @jwildeboer
No clue but speculation.
As a fact that would (beside a lot else) break the NATO article5. War by invasion or not. It'd be an Annexation. A declared(?) action of war(fare).
In reality the USA is just to powerful to conteract directly, by locals anyway.
It'd just mean the USA left Nato by this. And any country or the EU has to consider follow ups ( #ClubOfOligarchs) if they'd react accordingly harsh/strong.
Educated guess: They are discussing such scenario already.
