What should Trump do about Greenland?

President-elect Donald Trump’s renewed desire to acquire Greenland, by force if necessary, has caused much ado in Denmark, Greenland and NATO in Europe. Both Denmark, which is responsible for defending Greenland, and the political leadership in Greenland oppose the idea of ​​ceding the island to the United States. However, an invasion of Greenland is not necessarily a possibility.

If a US invasion appears imminent, Denmark and one or more other NATO allies will likely trigger Article V of the North Atlantic Treaty, which would oblige all NATO legislative bodies to vote on the defense of Greenland. As the Treaty states, “If such an armed attack occurs, each of them… shall assist the Party or Parties so attacked by taking such action immediately, individually and in coordination with the other Parties… including the use of Armed weapons. “The force to restore and maintain security in the North Atlantic region.”

In other words, if Washington chose to invade Greenland, its NATO allies could band together to help Greenland; In fact, the US Congress may vote, improbably, in favor of acting on Article 5, thus obligating America to defend Greenland against its invading forces!

Perhaps most worrying, and most sobering, is that Article 42.7 of the EU’s 2007 Lisbon Treaty automatically obligates member states to militarily defend each other. It does not provide for legislative approval, as is the case with NATO. Thus, NATO’s joint forces in Europe (but not Canada, which is not a member of the European Union) would be committed to confronting the American invasion.

None of these scenarios are likely to happen. Trump’s concerns about the Far North are legitimate; He is right to look for a more robust defense against potential Chinese or Russian operations in that region. Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen has indicated that he is ready to discuss these concerns with the next president. There is much that Denmark and other NATO allies can do, if they wish, to strengthen the alliance’s defenses in Greenland.

Denmark must agree to finance most of the costs of additional facilities and bases to be built in Greenland. It is worth noting that Tokyo spends up to $2 billion, or up to 70% of the total annual cost of the US military operation in Japan. Seoul is spending about $1 billion to do the same in South Korea. Denmark should commit to providing at least a percentage equal to Japan’s in support of US operations in Greenland.

Greenland currently hosts the Pitovik Space Base, formerly known as Thule Air Base, located in northwest Greenland. The United States also operated an air base at Sonderstrom in central Greenland until 1992, when the base was converted into a civilian airport; The Cold War was over and Washington no longer viewed Russia as a threat to Western security. Only a small detachment of the Air National Guard continues to operate at Sonderstrom.

As an initial step, Denmark could expand the military facility near Sonderstrom civilian airport. The now closed Rhein-Main air base provides a model for such an arrangement. This base was adjacent to Frankfurt International Airport, with which it shared runways and facilities.

Denmark currently spends no more than 1.6% of its GDP on defence. Although the Danish government has committed to achieving NATO’s military spending target of 2 percent in the coming years, NATO is likely to raise this target to 3 percent. Reaching this level of defense spending while committing to spend money on an expanded US presence in Greenland would certainly strain the Danish budget.

Other NATO allies, especially those further north, should consider contributing to the increasing costs of expanding the airport to accommodate a military facility, thus easing the financial burden on Denmark. In any case, an increased American presence in Greenland would constitute a strong contribution to NATO’s common defense. Washington and NATO should also consider attributing Denmark’s expenditures in Greenland to the 3% target.

There is no doubt that NATO must do more to ensure the security of its northern flank. For this reason, Trump’s fears are not without merit. However, this should not be the issue that prompts Washington to even consider military action.

Funding an expansion of the US presence on the island, with Denmark and perhaps other countries emulating and financing America’s Asian allies, offers a practical solution to the need to enhance security on NATO’s northern flank, without causing Europe to conjure up nightmare scenarios about going to the island. War with its strongest and closest allies.

Dove S. Zakheim is a senior advisor at Center for Strategic and International Studies Vice Chairman of the Board of Directors L Foreign Policy Research Institute. He was Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) and CFO of the Department of Defense from 2001 to 2004 and Deputy Under Secretary of Defense from 1985 to 1987.