What should be done right now to ensure Europe's security?

Taking the events in Greenland as a backdrop, there are four things that must be done immediately.

First, the presence of military personnel from other European countries in Greenland and the Arctic more broadly should become permanent. This presence, which has finally been established, must be maintained.

Second, the European Union must adopt a very positive and open political stance toward Greenland, as well as toward Iceland and Norway, creating favorable conditions for their potential accession to the EU.

Third, concrete steps must be taken to strengthen internal EU defense and security cooperation, including the formation of specific combat units.

Fourth, the EU must present itself as a strong and reliable partner elsewhere in the world. At this moment, swift ratification of a major agreement with the South American Mercosur countries (Brazil, Argentina, Uruguay, Paraguay) would support that goal. The result would be a unified free trade area of more than 800 million people. What is happening in Greenland from the American perspective reflects major global shifts. Europe must be a serious global player and the Mercosur agreement is one clear way to send that signal.

What exactly does internal consolidation mean? Does it involve the creation of military units?

In the past, EU defense cooperation included the practice of forming geographically based battle groups — for example, the Nordic Battle Group, which Estonia also took part in. At the time, the main issue was the lack of political support — the groups were never deployed, only used for training exercises.

Now, the same model should be utilized again: different countries should engage in systematic cooperation based on geographic proximity, up to and including unified command structures.

In our region, it would be logical to involve the Nordic and Baltic countries and to expand beyond the EU by including, for instance, the United Kingdom and Norway. The same model could be applied in other parts of Europe as well. This would be the first step toward preparing comprehensive, unified European military forces.

The world is making this need clear to us. Otherwise, we'll once again be left throwing up our hands, wondering why others are doing us harm.

Are alliances really in such bad shape?

Fundamentally, it's clear that Europe — with its population size, wealth and history — should be able to defend itself. But over the past 30 years, there hasn't been serious effort in this area.

Now, rapid developments have taken place that make it clear: it's high time to pull ourselves together.

Should we also be prepared to defend ourselves militarily from our greatest ally, the United States?

Presidents come and go. I want to believe — and I think most Europeans also hope — that the current turbulence in Europe-U.S. relations will pass.

But it's clear that when it comes to serious matters, it's safer to rely on ourselves. Europe's core security issue remains its excessive dependence on the United States. It's wise to reduce such external dependencies or eliminate them altogether.

In your view, what are the United States' intentions? Could they decide to take military control of Greenland or is that off the table?

Unfortunately, no one can say that it's off the table. Looking at the actions of the U.S. president in recent days, such as the intent to impose tariffs on countries that have expressed solidarity with Denmark and Greenland, it's clear that relations are heading into deeper crisis.

For example, the European Parliament had planned to approve a U.S.-EU trade agreement that would have avoided tariffs on American goods in Europe. It's now evident that, in this context, that decision will not go forward. Any escalatory move by the U.S. will be met with a counter-response from Europe.

As for military intervention, of course I hope common sense will prevail and that it won't happen. But the world is in such a state today that nothing can be ruled out entirely.

Is it certain that the trade agreement, in its current form, will not be approved?

When the U.S. president has just threatened a number of European countries with unilateral sanctions — in other words, tariffs — the Parliament cannot, under these circumstances, approve the agreement at this time.

Does Europe have the capacity to impose tariffs in response — for example, on digital services or aircraft?

If the agreement signed this summer does not enter into force and Parliament doesn't approve it, then tariffs on certain American products will inevitably follow.

In international politics, it's standard practice that if one side takes hostile unilateral action, the other side has no choice but to respond in kind. Europe cannot simply stand by while the U.S. president threatens to punish countries conducting exercises in the Arctic and Greenland aimed at ensuring regional security.

Do you support the participation of Estonian soldiers — even if just five or ten — in exercises in Greenland?

Cooperation within the European Union and NATO is based on solidarity. If one member state needs support from others — for instance, in organizing military exercises — then that support is given.

The short answer is: yes.

--

Follow ERR News on Facebook and X and never miss an update!