A leading political scientist is warning that a fragmented European response to Donald Trump’s renewed interest in Grönland poses a significant risk to transatlantic security and highlights a deeper crisis in European foreign policy coordination. Stefanie Babst, former chief strategist for NATO, argues that the current reactive, individualistic approach by European nations is insufficient to counter what she perceives as a deliberate tactic of intimidation by the former U.S. president.
Speaking to Phoenix television, Babst expressed concern over a lack of strategic alignment within Europe, criticizing the prevalence of solo diplomatic missions and fleeting statements rather than concerted, proactive planning. She called for the establishment of a forum where European experts could collaboratively assess and develop response strategies to a potential Trump administration, particularly in light of his ambitions concerning Grönland.
Babst dismissed the notion that Trump’s interest in Grönland is rooted in genuine Arctic security concerns. Instead, she asserted that it represents an attempt to “massively intimidate” a NATO ally, to pressure its sovereignty and to demonstrate a willingness to unilaterally claim territory – a posture she described as akin to a child’s demand.
The expert vehemently criticized Europe’s current posture of cautious consideration and potential compromise as completely inadequate. “The answer to Europe shouldn’t be ‘let’s see if we can accommodate him'” she stated. “It should be: ‘Mr. Trump, you should apologize for such transgressions and then perhaps we can seriously discuss important issues again.’
Babst further lamented the absence of such a strategic deliberative process within both the EU and NATO. While acknowledging the possibility of discussing initiatives like a NATO Arctic mission, she emphasized the necessity of conducting these deliberations behind closed doors, followed by a binding agreement on a unified European action line. Her critique underscores a broader concern regarding the EU’s ability to project a cohesive foreign policy agenda and its capacity to effectively navigate a potentially disruptive return of Donald Trump to the U.S. presidency. The lack of preparation and coordinated response, according to Babst, fundamentally undermines European and transatlantic security interests.