As pressure from the United States on Denmark intensifies over the future of Greenland, divisions within the European Union are becoming increasingly visible. Hungary has emerged as one of the clearest voices opposing any collective EU involvement in the dispute, arguing that the issue does not fall within the bloc’s remit.
Speaking on Monday, Hungarian Foreign Minister Peter Szijjártó said that Greenland’s future should not be treated as a matter for the European Union and confirmed that Hungary would not support any joint EU statement on the issue. Addressing reporters during a visit to Prague, Szijjártó stressed that the situation should be handled directly by the parties concerned.
“We consider this a bilateral issue that can be resolved through negotiations between the two sides,” he said, adding that he did not see any justification for EU-level intervention. “I don’t think this is an EU issue,” he reiterated.
These remarks come at a time when Donald Trump has stepped up diplomatic and economic pressure on Denmark over Greenland, a semi-autonomous territory within the Kingdom of Denmark and a fellow member of NATO. Trump has repeatedly floated the idea that the United States should take control of the strategically important Arctic island, a stance that has unsettled European capitals and heightened tensions across the continent.
Hungary’s position places it at odds with several other EU member states that are pushing for a unified European response to Washington’s threats. As both an EU and NATO member, Hungary has frequently taken positions that diverge from those of its allies. Prime Minister Viktor Orbán is often described as one of Russian President Vladimir Putin’s closest partners within the EU and has previously been criticised for undermining European and transatlantic cohesion.
Meanwhile, Trump has continued to escalate his rhetoric. He has publicly linked his hardening stance on Greenland to his frustration at not having received the Nobel Peace Prize, suggesting that the dispute has altered his priorities. In an interview with NBC News, Trump declined to clarify whether he would consider using military force to seize Greenland but repeated warnings of economic retaliation.
On Saturday, Trump announced plans to impose 10 per cent tariffs starting February 1 on imports from eight European countries unless the United States reaches an agreement related to Greenland. These threats have already raised alarms about a potential trade conflict between Washington and Europe, coming at a time when NATO unity is already under strain due to the war in Ukraine and Trump’s long-standing demands that European allies increase defence spending.
The dispute has also spilled into direct diplomatic exchanges. In a text message sent on Sunday to Norwegian Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Støre, Trump said that because Norway had not awarded him the Nobel Peace Prize for what he claimed were major peace achievements, he no longer felt obliged to focus solely on peace, but would instead prioritise what he considered to be in the best interests of the United States.
Denmark, for its part, has firmly pushed back against US pressure. Danish Foreign Minister Lars Løkke Rasmussen dismissed Trump’s tactics during a visit to London, making clear that Greenland is not a commodity to be negotiated over.
“We are living in 2026. You can trade with people, but you don’t trade people,” Rasmussen said. He added that Denmark would not yield to pressure and would continue to stand by dialogue, mutual respect, and international law. Copenhagen has consistently maintained that Greenland’s status can only be determined by the people of Greenland themselves. The island, which has a population of around 57,000, is considered strategically important due to its location and mineral resources.
Despite Hungary’s objections, EU leaders are expected to address the issue at an emergency summit in Brussels on Thursday. A range of potential countermeasures is set to be discussed. One option under consideration is a package of retaliatory tariffs targeting €93 billion (about $108 billion) worth of US imports, which could automatically come into force on February 6 after a six-month suspension.
Another measure being weighed is the possible activation of the EU’s Anti-Coercion Instrument, a powerful but as yet untested mechanism. This tool could allow the bloc to restrict US access to EU public tenders, investment opportunities, or financial services, and could also extend to services trade—an area in which the United States runs a surplus with the EU, particularly in digital services.
The European Commission has said it continues to engage with Washington “at all levels” in an effort to defuse the situation diplomatically, while confirming that the use of the anti-coercion instrument remains on the table should negotiations fail.
