What can Europe learn from Trump’s Greenland tariff threats?

Tariffs threats were a key component of the unprecedented pressure campaign used by President Trump in his attempt to acquire Greenland. This is yet another example of the centrality of tariffs to United States foreign policy under his administration. Regardless of the just-announced arrangement on Greenland, there are multiple fault lines – digital regulation for example – over which the August 2025 EU-US Turnberry agreement on tariffs could unravel.

The handling of US demands on Greenland by European governments appears to have been a feat of diplomacy, balancing soft public messaging with clear signals of determination to retaliate strongly if necessary. Together, this has deterred an actual imposition of tariffs and facilitated de-escalation – at least for now. That these demands arose at all is, however, also the result of the European Union quickly conceding to US demands in summer 2025. This might have been justified to maintain support for Ukraine and help European businesses adapt to high and volatile US tariffs, but it was widely read as a sign of European weakness.

The transatlantic relationship is arguably the most important one in the global economy. Tariffs harm the economy by directly increasing costs and create uncertain trading conditions which can delay or deter investments. It is, therefore, in the economic interest of the EU to stabilise tariff levels and prevent a repeat of the Greenland crisis. The lesson for the EU is that this requires a more robust stance and a greater readiness for retaliation than has been shown in the past. The White House will be less inclined to repeat such actions if it believes that economic coercion will be consistently met with firm resistance.

The Why Axis is a weekly newsletter distributed by Bruegel, bringing you the latest research on European economic policy. 

Sign up for the newsletter.