US Ambassador to NATO Addresses European Concerns Over Greenland and Defense Priorities

In an exclusive interview with Fox News Digital, US Ambassador to NATO Matthew Whitaker addressed growing tensions between the United States and European allies over America’s focus on Greenland. Speaking candidly about the diplomatic situation, Whitaker characterized the matter as primarily “an issue between the United States, Denmark, and Greenland,” while suggesting that European concerns may represent an overreaction. His comments come as France announced new military exercises with Denmark, highlighting the increasing international attention on Arctic security issues. Whitaker emphasized that Greenland’s strategic location makes it central to American defense planning, especially as climate change transforms the Arctic region, creating new maritime routes and security challenges that directly impact the United States’ northern security perimeter.

Ambassador Whitaker articulated a clear strategic vision regarding Greenland’s significance to American national security interests. “As the ice thaws and as routes open up in the Arctic, Arctic security, and therefore the security of Greenland, which is the northern flank of the continental United States, is crucial,” he explained. This perspective underscores a growing recognition among defense planners that climate change is fundamentally altering the geopolitical landscape of the Arctic. Whitaker further emphasized the maritime dimension, noting that Greenland’s position provides critical access to naval assets and that “monitoring and awareness and fortification of that part of the Western Hemisphere is crucial for the long-term security of the United States.” Despite these strong statements about American interests, Whitaker pointed to recent productive diplomatic engagements between Danish and Greenlandic officials with Vice President Vance and Secretary of State Rubio as evidence that tensions can be managed constructively through dialogue rather than confrontation.

Speaking from the symbolic setting of the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library, Whitaker invoked Reagan’s “peace through strength” doctrine to frame his approach to NATO alliance management and defense spending priorities. He drew direct parallels between Reagan’s policies and the current administration’s approach, suggesting a philosophical continuity in American leadership that emphasizes military capability as the foundation of effective deterrence. “The most important thing that we’re doing at NATO is, one, the United States is strong. Nobody denies that,” Whitaker stated, referencing recent American military operations as demonstrations of power projection capabilities. However, his assessment of NATO allies’ readiness was more nuanced, acknowledging varying levels of progress while expressing concern that some members still fall short of their commitments. Whitaker’s comments reflect a persistent American frustration with the pace of European defense spending increases, though he was careful to avoid “painting with a broad brush” across all NATO partners.

The ambassador identified economic revitalization in Europe as a prerequisite for meaningful increases in defense capabilities among NATO allies. “Europe and the EU are going to have to untie their hands from behind their back,” he asserted, advocating for deregulation and measures to stimulate economic growth as necessary foundations for expanded defense budgets. This perspective links security capabilities directly to economic policy choices, suggesting that European countries must adopt more growth-oriented approaches if they hope to fulfill their NATO obligations. Whitaker indicated that he regularly raises these economic concerns with EU officials, emphasizing that without stronger economic performance, European countries will struggle to generate the financial resources needed for significant military investments. This economic dimension adds complexity to the transatlantic security relationship, as it suggests that differences in economic philosophy may be as significant as divergent security assessments in explaining NATO’s capability gaps.

Whitaker highlighted significant variations in how different NATO members perceive and respond to security threats, particularly regarding Russia. He noted that countries geographically closer to Russia—specifically mentioning the Baltic states, Nordic countries, and Poland—demonstrate a more urgent approach to defense preparedness. “Poland is clear-eyed,” he remarked, noting their plans to spend over 5% of GDP on core defense. This geographic pattern suggests that proximity to Russia correlates strongly with defense spending priorities, with Poland standing out as an exemplar of commitment. Whitaker’s comments reflect an understanding that threat perception varies substantially across the alliance, with some members still not fully aligned with American assessments of the security environment. The Russian annexation of Crimea in 2014 and the full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022 serve as reference points that have shaped these varying perspectives, though not uniformly across all NATO countries.

Looking forward, Whitaker emphasized that his primary focus is ensuring NATO allies translate their political commitments from last year’s meeting in The Hague into concrete military capabilities. He revealed that he maintains a regularly updated dashboard tracking each country’s progress, though he acknowledged it remains “too soon to tell” whether all allies will meet their obligations. The ambassador stressed that defense investments must focus on genuine combat readiness—”capabilities” that make NATO members “stronger, ready to fight tonight”—rather than merely reaching spending targets. Comparing American and European approaches, Whitaker referenced President Trump’s announcement of a $1.5 trillion defense budget as evidence of US commitment, while expressing measured optimism about allies’ responses: “We’re asking our European and Canadian allies to do more. So far, so good.” Drawing again on the Reagan connection, he advocated for economic policies that “unleash the American entrepreneur” and “American innovation” through regulatory reduction, suggesting a model he believes European countries would benefit from adopting to strengthen both their economies and defense capabilities.