The Greenland flag is pictured on August 18, 2019 in Kulusuk (also spelled Qulusuk), a settlement in the Sermersooq municipality located on the island of the same name on the southeastern shore of Greenland. Jonathan Nackstrand, AFP/FileBRUSSELS, Belgium-- The White House has said President Donald Trump is discussing options including military action to take Greenland -- despite a warning from Denmark that an attack would spell the end of NATO.
But how high really is the risk that Trump's desire for the territory might end up sinking an alliance that has underpinned Western security for over seven decades?
The answer depends on whether Trump is really planning to make a move and if the specter of military force is just a bluff to exert pressure.
Here's how the situation could break down:
- US ups threats -
In the wake of his military intervention in Venezuela, Trump set off alarm bells in Europe by repeating his insistence that he wants to take control of Greenland.
The mineral-rich semi-autonomous territory -- part of Washington's long-standing NATO ally Denmark and home already to a US military base -- has been in Trump's sights since his first term in office.
But this time around his administration has ramped up its rhetoric by insisting that "acquiring Greenland is a national security priority".
"The president and his team are discussing a range of options to pursue this important foreign policy goal, and of course, utilizing the US military is always an option," White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said Tuesday.
That came despite a warning from Danish premier Mette Frederiksen an attack on a NATO ally would end the alliance -- and a show of support for Copenhagen from key European leaders.
READ: Greenland PM urges Trump to drop annex threats
- Military route? -
While Trump was willing to deploy US military might against long-standing foe Venezuela, using force against a close ally like Denmark is a different ball game.
French President Emmanuel Macron said he couldn't "imagine a scenario" under which Washington would violate Danish sovereignty.
Any US military action against Greenland would effectively tear NATO apart.
READ: Trump weighs military option to acquire Greenland
Its Article Five pledge that members will defend each other if attacked is meant to deter threats from outside -- and the idea of its key power would turn on an ally was seen as inconceivable.
Under an existing agreement with Denmark, the United States could already station more troops in Greenland if it wants.
Officials at NATO have repeatedly played down the prospect Trump could invade -- but admit that with the US leader they can never be sure.
"We don't believe he would -- there is no need -- the US can get any access they want from Denmark," a senior NATO diplomat told AFP, speaking as others on condition of anonymity.
"But given the persistent rhetoric, we can't be entirely sure."
So far there has been no sign of the sort of military buildup witnessed around Venezuela and some US officials have been pressing other options.
US media reported Secretary of State Marco Rubio told lawmakers Trump wants to buy Greenland rather than attack it -- and the hope from NATO is that diplomacy will win out.
"I hope the Danes, the Greenlanders and the Americans will sit around a fire somewhere and an outcome will be reached," a second NATO diplomat said.
- NATO steers clear -
So far NATO as an organization has tried to stay out of the Greenland issue.
"I don't think this issue will ever be brought up in a NATO framework in order to avoid any divisions," a third NATO diplomat said.
With Russia's war raging in Ukraine, European members are desperate not to jeopardize US involvement in helping to shield them from Moscow.
Alliance chief Mark Rutte has tried to deflect US interest by emphasizing joint efforts to bolster security in the Arctic against threats from Russia and China, a key justification by Trump for wanting Greenland.
"The Danes are totally fine if the US would have a bigger presence than they have now," Rutte told CNN. "We have to make sure that the Arctic stays safe."
While the alliance takes a backseat, some more bullish European members may try to be more assertive.
French Foreign Minister Jean-Noel Barrot said Paris was talking to Germany and Poland to come up with a plan for a possible response.
There are fears though that just by raising the prospect of attacking an ally -- or pressuring it to cede territory -- the United States may have already damaged NATO.
"No one has any interest in a quarrel within NATO, except our enemies," said Belgian defense minister Theo Francken.
"I'm convinced initiatives will be taken in the coming days, behind the scenes or in the open, to resolve this situation."