The Swamp logo

The Transatlantic Order is Crumbling: Greenland as a Moment of Great Rupture

“Greenland Exposes Cracks in the Transatlantic Alliance”

By Aarif LashariPublished about 6 hours ago 3 min read

Recent geopolitical events surrounding Greenland have highlighted deep fractures in the transatlantic order, marking what experts describe as a “moment of great rupture.” In his analysis, Christopher S. Chivvis emphasizes how tensions over the Arctic territory reflect broader challenges in U.S.-European relations, signaling a potential reshaping of alliances and strategic priorities.

Greenland at the Center of Geopolitical Tensions

Greenland, an autonomous territory of Denmark, has become a focal point of international attention due to its strategic location in the Arctic and its rich natural resources. The island has long been important for military surveillance, shipping routes, and resource extraction, but recent U.S. interest, particularly under former President Trump, has intensified scrutiny.

Chivvis argues that Greenland is more than just a geographic asset; it is a symbol of the shifting dynamics between the United States and its European allies. The controversies surrounding attempts to purchase or control Greenland reveal how traditional transatlantic trust is being tested.

The Crumbling Transatlantic Order

The transatlantic alliance, anchored by NATO and long-standing U.S.-European cooperation, faces significant strains. Chivvis notes that disagreements over Greenland, defense spending, and strategic priorities expose divergent interests among allies.

Historically, European nations relied on the U.S. for security guarantees, while the U.S. relied on Europe for economic and strategic partnership. Today, these assumptions are being questioned as the U.S. emphasizes its own strategic priorities, sometimes at odds with collective European goals.

A Moment of Great Rupture

Chivvis describes the Greenland situation as a “moment of great rupture” because it illustrates the fragility of established alliances. Unlike conventional disputes over trade or defense spending, Greenland represents both geopolitical leverage and symbolic power.

The U.S. Treasury Secretary’s recent dismissive remarks toward Denmark, calling it “irrelevant,” only exacerbate tensions. Such rhetoric challenges the norms of diplomacy and raises questions about the future of cooperative transatlantic decision-making.

Strategic Importance of Greenland

Greenland’s value lies in multiple domains:

Military: The island hosts radar stations and airbases crucial for monitoring Arctic airspace.

Economic: Greenland possesses significant natural resources, including rare earth minerals, oil, and gas reserves.

Environmental: Arctic melting opens new shipping routes, creating opportunities and risks for global commerce.

Chivvis highlights that control or influence over Greenland has implications far beyond regional disputes, affecting global power balances and Arctic geopolitics.

U.S.-Europe Divergence

The Greenland row demonstrates diverging priorities between the U.S. and Europe. While the U.S. focuses on asserting strategic control and countering emerging powers like China and Russia in the Arctic, Europe emphasizes multilateralism, sovereignty, and respect for autonomous territories.

This divergence signals that the U.S. may increasingly act unilaterally, testing the resilience of long-standing alliances and requiring Europe to rethink its security and diplomatic strategies.

Implications for NATO and the Arctic

Chivvis points out that NATO, historically the backbone of transatlantic security, faces challenges in coordinating strategy in the Arctic. Greenland’s location gives it strategic leverage that could influence NATO operations, airspace monitoring, and regional defense planning.

The Greenland dispute is therefore not just bilateral; it has broader implications for multilateral security frameworks and the future of cooperative defense.

Greenland’s Autonomy and Local Interests

Greenlandic leaders have consistently asserted that the island’s autonomy and decision-making must be respected. Any attempt by global powers to exert control without consent could destabilize local governance and provoke diplomatic fallout.

Chivvis emphasizes that recognizing Greenland’s voice is essential to maintaining legitimacy and stability in the Arctic, especially as climate change and resource exploitation increase global interest.

Broader Lessons for Global Politics

The Greenland episode illustrates several important lessons for international relations:

Strategic resources matter: Territorial control can shift power balances.

Alliances are not immutable: Even long-standing partnerships can fracture under competing interests.

Local voices are crucial: Autonomy and self-determination must be respected to maintain legitimacy.

Geopolitical signaling matters: Public rhetoric, like dismissing allies, can have long-term consequences.

Chivvis argues that understanding these lessons is vital for policymakers navigating the increasingly complex global order.

Looking Ahead: A Reshaping of Alliances

The Greenland situation may be a harbinger of broader shifts in global power dynamics. Chivvis suggests that the transatlantic alliance must adapt, balancing U.S. strategic priorities with European cohesion and respect for autonomous territories like Greenland.

Failing to address these tensions could result in weaker cooperation, increased unilateralism, and vulnerability to emerging powers, including China and Russia.

Conclusion: Greenland as a Symbol of Change

Christopher S. Chivvis frames Greenland as a symbolic and strategic pivot point in global geopolitics. The island embodies the fragility of the transatlantic order and the challenges of navigating alliances in the 21st century.

As Greenland remains at the center of international attention, it serves as a reminder that geography, resources, and diplomacy are deeply intertwined, and that the old assumptions of alliance stability may no longer hold. For policymakers, respecting local autonomy while managing strategic interests will be crucial to preserving cooperation and preventing further rupture in the transatlantic relationship.

politics

About the Creator

Reader insights

Be the first to share your insights about this piece.

How does it work?

Add your insights

Comments

There are no comments for this story

Be the first to respond and start the conversation.

Sign in to comment

    Find us on social media

    Miscellaneous links

    • Explore
    • Contact
    • Privacy Policy
    • Terms of Use
    • Support

    © 2026 Creatd, Inc. All Rights Reserved.