Denmark’s Defence Ministry has reiterated that its armed forces are bound by a long-standing directive that requires soldiers to respond immediately to any foreign invasion, including by opening fire without waiting for orders from senior commanders. This rule becomes relevant in the event that Danish territory is threatened, including areas under Denmark’s authority such as Greenland. The ministry explained that this instruction is still valid today, despite being framed decades ago, and reflects Denmark’s approach to territorial defence in situations where rapid response is essential.
The directive dates back to 1952 and emerged from lessons learned during World War II, particularly when Nazi Germany invaded Denmark in April 1940. At that time, Danish communications systems partially collapsed, leaving frontline forces without clear guidance from central command. The lack of coordination severely hampered Denmark’s ability to respond, prompting authorities in later years to adopt a doctrine that prioritised immediate action by troops on the ground if the country were ever attacked again.
Under this framework, Danish soldiers are expected to act on their own judgment if a foreign force threatens Danish soil, rather than delaying action while waiting for instructions. In the context of Greenland, Denmark’s Joint Arctic Command would be responsible for determining whether a given situation qualifies as an armed attack and whether the directive should be applied.
The issue has gained renewed attention as US President Donald Trump has repeatedly expressed interest in Greenland and has refused to rule out the use of force to gain control of the autonomous territory, which remains under Danish sovereignty. Trump has argued that Greenland is strategically vital for American national security, citing increased activity by Russian and Chinese vessels in Arctic waters and the region’s importance to military and defence planning.
In interviews, Trump has said that he does not view limited arrangements such as leases or treaties as sufficient, insisting instead that full ownership of Greenland would provide the United States with strategic advantages that agreements alone could not deliver. He has suggested that possession of the territory would allow greater control and flexibility in matters related to security and defence.
The United States already operates under a 1951 agreement that grants it wide latitude to establish military installations in Greenland, provided it has the consent of both Denmark and the Greenlandic authorities. Despite this, both Copenhagen and Nuuk have consistently stated that Greenland is not for sale and that its political status is not open to negotiation.
Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen has issued a stark warning in response to Trump’s comments, stating that any military attempt by the United States to seize Greenland would effectively bring an end to NATO as it is currently understood. She emphasised that an armed attack by one NATO member against another would undermine the alliance’s very foundation and shared commitments.
US Vice President JD Vance has defended Washington’s position, arguing that Denmark has failed to adequately ensure Greenland’s role as a pillar of global security. He has said the territory is crucial not only for American interests but also for broader international stability, particularly due to its significance in missile defence and Arctic security.
Amid the rising tension, Danish and Greenlandic representatives in Washington have held meetings with White House officials in an effort to ease concerns and persuade US policymakers to abandon any plans involving the use of force. Further diplomatic engagement is expected, with the US Secretary of State scheduled to meet Danish officials in the coming days as both sides attempt to manage the growing strain over Greenland’s future.
