(WASHINGTON) — The Supreme Court on Wednesday sharply questioned President Donald Trump’s assertion of unchecked power to remove a member of the Federal Reserve over the mere allegation of gross negligence and without any opportunity for a hearing to dispute the claims.
A majority of justices also appeared likely to deny Trump’s request to immediately remove Lisa Cook from her position as litigation continues, though it was less clear whether the court would definitively weigh in on the substance of the allegations or the proper standard for removal under the law.
This is a developing story. Please check back for updates.
DHS is using the CBP Home Mobile App to incentivize self-deportation. (Department of Homeland Security)
(WASHINGTON) — The Department of Homeland Security announced on Wednesday that it is increasing its stipend for those who are in the United States illegally and self-deport by $1,600.
Previously, DHS offered $1,000 to those who use the Customs and Border Protection (CBP) Home App to self-deport, but now, it’s raising that number to $2,600.
DHS claimed that since January 2025, 2.2 million people who are in the U.S. illegally have voluntarily self-deported — with “tens of thousands” using the CBP app. A report from the Brookings Institution released last week called DHS’ data into question, saying the department’s numbers “should not be considered a serious source.”
“To celebrate one year of this administration, the U.S. taxpayer is generously increasing the incentive to leave voluntarily for those in this country illegally- offering a $2,600 exit bonus,” Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem said in a release. “Illegal aliens should take advantage of this gift and self-deport because if they don’t, we will find them, we will arrest them, and they will never return.”
The increased amount is to mark to the first year of President Donald Trump’s term in office, and may only be temporary, DHS said in the release.
For months, the department has been pushing self-deportations — spending millions on advertisements that showcased it’s previous $1,000 payment and a plane ticket that people who register to self-deport are given.
It’s not clear how much money in total has been given to people who have self-deported.
DHS said in the first year of Trump’s term, there were 675,000 deportations. The authors of the Brookings Institution report estimated a figure much lower last week — saying there were between 310,000 and 315,000 removals in 2025.
Deporting migrants who are illegally in the U.S. was one of Trump’s key campaign promises, but advocates have said that Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Border Patrol tactics have gone too far in some cases.
A memorial dedicated to the 19 children and two adults murdered on May 24, 2022 during a mass shooting at Robb Elementary School is seen on January 06, 2026 in Uvalde, Texas. (Brandon Bell/Getty Images)
(CORPUS CHRISTI, Texas) — Deliberations are underway in the trial of former Uvalde schools police officer Adrian Gonzales on Wednesday after prosecutors and defense lawyers delivered their closing arguments.
Before jurors were sent to deliberate, District Attorney Christina Mitchell gave an impassioned plea, saying, “I know this case is difficult, and it has been difficult. But we cannot continue to let children die in vain.”
“What happened to Uvalde on May 24 can happen anywhere, at any time,” she said. “If it’s going to happen, and if we have laws mandating what the responsibility of a law enforcement peace officer is for a school district, then we better be ready to back it up.”
At issue is whether Gonzales — one of the first officers to arrive at Robb Elementary on May 24, 2022 — ignored his training and endangered dozens of students when he responded to the shooting, which became one of the worst mass shootings in U.S. history.
Nineteen students and two teachers died, with police officers waiting 77 minutes to confront the gunman. While the shooting response has been the subject of hearings and investigations, the case against Gonzales marks the first criminal trial related to the shooting and the delayed police response.
Prosecution’s closing argument
The jury has an opportunity to “set the bar” for how officers should respond to school shootings, prosecutor Bill Turner said on Wednesday.
“If it’s appropriate to stand outside hearing [hundreds of] shots while children are being slaughtered, that is your decision to tell the state of Texas,” Turner said.
While teachers and students were sheltering in their classrooms — doing exactly what their training taught them to do in an active shooter scenario — the police officer trained to help them failed to act, Turner said. Turner argued that each gunshot fired at Robb Elementary was “notice to Adrian Gonzalez to advance toward the gunfire,” but he failed to follow his training and act in the crucial first minutes of the shooting.
“If you have a duty to act, you can’t stand by while the child is in imminent danger,” Turner said.
Turner pointed jurors to the testimony of teaching aide Melodye Flores, a key prosecution witness who said she pleaded with Gonzales to intervene. Turner argued that the warning from Flores and the clear sound of gunfire should have triggered Gonzales to act.
“The training is, you hear shots, you go to the gunfire. He heard shots, and Melodye Flores was pointing where to go to the gunfire. There’s nothing complicated about that,” Turner said.
Defense’s closing argument
Convicting Gonzales will send a clear message to officers who respond to this country’s next mass shooting, defense attorney Jason Goss said.
“What you tell police officers is, ‘Don’t go in. Don’t react. Don’t respond,'” Goss warned jurors. “We cannot have law enforcement feel that way.”
Goss argued that prosecutors tried to “massage the facts” of the case and “twist them all into a pretzel” to argue Gonzales failed to act. According to Goss, Gonzales did the best he could with the information he had when he arrived at Robb Elementary. While other officers arrived within the same timeframe, only Gonzales is being penalized for attempting to take action that day, he argued.
Goss attempted to empathize with the jurors and the families of victims, arguing he understood the desire for criminal accountability. But he reminded jurors, “The monster who hurt those kids is dead.”
But convicting Gonzales, Goss argued, would do “an injustice” for the victims of the shooting.
“You do not honor their memory by doing an injustice in their name,” he said.
What is he charged with?
Gonzales was charged with 29 felony counts of abandoning/endangering children — one count for each of the 19 students who died in the shooting and the 10 children who survived in classroom 112.
Each count carries a maximum penalty of two years in prison, and Gonzales could spend the rest of his life in prison if he is convicted. While juries in Texas sometimes determine criminal sentences, Gonzales has opted to be sentenced by Judge Sid Harle if he is convicted.
What happened to the police chief’s case?
Along with Gonzales, prosecutors also charged former Uvalde schools Police Chief Pete Arredondo, who was the scene commander during the Robb shooting. His case has been indefinitely delayed due to a pending civil lawsuit involving the tactical unit that ultimately breached the classroom and killed the shooter.
Are there any comparable cases?
According to Phil Stinson — a professor at Bowling Green State University in Ohio who maintains a database of police officers who have been arrested — the case against Gonzales is uncommon but not unprecedented.
Prosecutors in Florida attempted to similarly charge a law enforcement officer for his response to the 2018 shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida. Seventeen were killed when a gunman opened fire that day, Feb. 14, 2018, in Parkland.
A jury in 2023 acquitted Scot Peterson, the former Broward County sheriff’s deputy, after he was charged with child neglect and culpable negligence for his alleged inaction following the shooting.
A large vinyl decal displaying the official circular logo of the European Parliament, along with the full blue and yellow starred flag of the European Union, is affixed to the glass curtain wall of the institution’s building in Brussels, Belgium, on December 16, 2025. Michael Nguyen/NurPhoto via Getty Images
(NEW YORK) — European lawmakers on Wednesday suspended a trade agreement with the United States over tariff threats issued by President Donald Trump as part of his push to acquire Greenland.
The announcement came minutes after President Donald Trump reasserted his call for U.S. ownership of Greenland during a speech at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland.
The speech followed tariff threats issued by Trump days earlier against seven European Union countries, plus the U.K., over the issue.
European leaders, meanwhile, have pushed back on Trump’s ambitions. Greenland is a self-governing territory of the Kingdom of Denmark, a member of the EU.
Members of the Committee on International Trade (INTA) – a body within the European Parliament – hold “unshakable commitment to the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Denmark and Greenland,” European Parliament member Bernd Lange, an INTA chair on EU-US trade relations, said in a statement on Wednesday.
“By threatening the territorial integrity and sovereignty of an E.U. member state and by using tariffs as a coercive instrument, the U.S. is undermining the stability and predictability of EU-US trade relations,” Lange added.
The EU and US struck the trade agreement in July, moving to ratchet down tariffs on European goods and restore stability to the commercial relationship. At the time, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said the agreement “creates certainty in uncertain times.”
On Wednesday, Lange said the E.U. would pause the ratification process in response to Trump’s proposed tariffs. Under Trump’s plan, eight European nations – including Denmark, France, Germany and the United Kingdom – will be slapped with 10% tariffs beginning on Feb. 1. Those levies are set to escalate to 25% on June 1, Trump said.
In his speech on Wednesday, Trump ruled out use of the military in his push for Greenland. “We probably won’t get anything unless I decide to use excessive strength and force where we would be, frankly, unstoppable. But I won’t do that,” Trump said.
U.S. stocks slumped on Tuesday in response to the tariffs, with the Dow closing down 870 points, but recovered roughly half of those losses in a rally on Wednesday morning. In Europe, the pan-continental STOXX 600 index ticked slightly lower on Wednesday.
ABC News’ David Brennan contributed to this report.
A memorial dedicated to the 19 children and two adults murdered on May 24, 2022 during a mass shooting at Robb Elementary School is seen on January 06, 2026 in Uvalde, Texas. (Brandon Bell/Getty Images)
(CORPUS CHRISTI, Texas) — As soon as Wednesday afternoon, a Texas jury will begin deliberating whether a law enforcement officer should be held criminally responsible for failing to act in the face of one of the worst mass shootings in U.S. history.
At issue is whether Gonzales — one of the first officers to arrive at Robb Elementary on May 24, 2022 — ignored his training and endangered dozens of students when he responded to the shooting.
Nineteen students and two teachers died, with police officers waiting 77 minutes to confront the gunman. While the shooting response has been the subject of hearings and investigations, the case against Gonzales marks the first criminal trial related to the shooting and the delayed police response.
Prosecution’s closing argument
The jury has an opportunity to “set the bar” for how officers should respond to school shootings, prosecutor Bill Turner said on Wednesday.
“If it’s appropriate to stand outside hearing [hundreds of] shots while children are being slaughtered, that is your decision to tell the state of Texas,” Turner said.
While teachers and students were sheltering in their classrooms — doing exactly what their training taught them to do in an active shooter scenario — the police officer trained to help them failed to act, Turner said. Turner argued that each gunshot fired at Robb Elementary was “notice to Adrian Gonzalez to advance toward the gunfire,” but he failed to follow his training and act in the crucial first minutes of the shooting.
“If you have a duty to act, you can’t stand by while the child is in imminent danger,” Turner said.
Turner pointed jurors to the testimony of teaching aide Melodye Flores, a key prosecution witness who said she pleaded with Gonzales to intervene. Turner argued that the warning from Flores and the clear sound of gunfire should have triggered Gonzales to act.
“The training is, you hear shots, you go to the gunfire. He heard shots, and Melodye Flores was pointing where to go to the gunfire. There’s nothing complicated about that,” Turner said.
Defense’s closing argument
Convicting Gonzales will send a clear message to officers who respond to this country’s next mass shooting, defense attorney Jason Goss said.
“What you tell police officers is, ‘Don’t go in. Don’t react. Don’t respond,'” Goss warned jurors. “We cannot have law enforcement feel that way.”
Goss argued that prosecutors tried to “massage the facts” of the case and “twist them all into a pretzel” to argue Gonzales failed to act. According to Goss, Gonzales did the best he could with the information he had when he arrived at Robb Elementary. While other officers arrived within the same timeframe, only Gonzales is being penalized for attempting to take action that day, he argued.
Goss attempted to empathize with the jurors and the families of victims, arguing he understood the desire for criminal accountability. But he reminded jurors, “The monster who hurt those kids is dead.”
But convicting Gonzales, Goss argued, would do “an injustice” for the victims of the shooting.
“You do not honor their memory by doing an injustice in their name,” he said.
What is he charged with?
Gonzales was charged with 29 felony counts of abandoning/endangering children — one count for each of the 19 students who died in the shooting and the 10 children who survived in classroom 112.
Each count carries a maximum penalty of two years in prison, and Gonzales could spend the rest of his life in prison if he is convicted. While juries in Texas sometimes determine criminal sentences, Gonzales has opted to be sentenced by Judge Sid Harle if he is convicted.
What happened to the police chief’s case?
Along with Gonzales, prosecutors also charged former Uvalde schools Police Chief Pete Arredondo, who was the scene commander during the Robb shooting. His case has been indefinitely delayed due to a pending civil lawsuit involving the tactical unit that ultimately breached the classroom and killed the shooter.
Are there any comparable cases?
According to Phil Stinson — a professor at Bowling Green State University in Ohio who maintains a database of police officers who have been arrested — the case against Gonzales is uncommon but not unprecedented.
Prosecutors in Florida attempted to similarly charge a law enforcement officer for his response to the 2018 shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida. Seventeen were killed when a gunman opened fire that day, Feb. 14, 2018, in Parkland.
A jury in 2023 acquitted Scot Peterson, the former Broward County sheriff’s deputy, after he was charged with child neglect and culpable negligence for his alleged inaction following the shooting.
A memorial dedicated to the 19 children and two adults murdered on May 24, 2022 during a mass shooting at Robb Elementary School is seen on January 06, 2026 in Uvalde, Texas. (Brandon Bell/Getty Images)
(CORPUS CHRISTI, Texas) — As soon as Wednesday afternoon, a Texas jury will begin deliberating whether a law enforcement officer should be held criminally responsible for failing to act in the face of one of the worst mass shootings in U.S. history.
At issue is whether Gonzales — one of the first officers to arrive at Robb Elementary on May 24, 2022 — ignored his training and endangered dozens of students when he responded to the shooting.
Nineteen students and two teachers died, with police officers waiting 77 minutes to confront the gunman. While the shooting response has been the subject of hearings and investigations, the case against Gonzales marks the first criminal trial related to the shooting and the delayed police response.
Prosecution’s closing argument
The jury has an opportunity to “set the bar” for how officers should respond to school shootings, prosecutor Bill Turner said on Wednesday.
“If it’s appropriate to stand outside hearing [hundreds of] shots while children are being slaughtered, that is your decision to tell the state of Texas,” Turner said.
While teachers and students were sheltering in their classrooms — doing exactly what their training taught them to do in an active shooter scenario — the police officer trained to help them failed to act, Turner said. Turner argued that each gunshot fired at Robb Elementary was “notice to Adrian Gonzalez to advance toward the gunfire,” but he failed to follow his training and act in the crucial first minutes of the shooting.
“If you have a duty to act, you can’t stand by while the child is in imminent danger,” Turner said.
Turner pointed jurors to the testimony of teaching aide Melodye Flores, a key prosecution witness who said she pleaded with Gonzales to intervene. Turner argued that the warning from Flores and the clear sound of gunfire should have triggered Gonzales to act.
“The training is, you hear shots, you go to the gunfire. He heard shots, and Melodye Flores was pointing where to go to the gunfire. There’s nothing complicated about that,” Turner said.
How did defense lawyers approach the case?
Defense lawyers spent less than three hours on Tuesday calling two witnesses before resting their case. Gonzales declined to testify in his own defense.
Gonzales’ lawyers have argued that he not only followed his training that day but also highlighted that other officers had similar — if not better — opportunities to stop the shooter.
They accused prosecutors of “Monday-morning quarterbacking” Gonzales’ actions that day and argued he acted appropriately based on the limited information he had in the moment. They also highlighted that Gonzales attempted to enter the building with other officers but was directed by his commanding officer to retreat to call in for SWAT support.
What is he charged with?
Gonzales was charged with 29 felony counts of abandoning/endangering children — one count for each of the 19 students who died in the shooting and the 10 children who survived in classroom 112.
Each count carries a maximum penalty of two years in prison, and Gonzales could spend the rest of his life in prison if he is convicted. While juries in Texas sometimes determine criminal sentences, Gonzales has opted to be sentenced by Judge Sid Harle if he is convicted.
What happened to the police chief’s case?
Along with Gonzales, prosecutors also charged former Uvalde schools Police Chief Pete Arredondo, who was the scene commander during the Robb shooting. His case has been indefinitely delayed due to a pending civil lawsuit involving the tactical unit that ultimately breached the classroom and killed the shooter.
Are there any comparable cases?
According to Phil Stinson — a professor at Bowling Green State University in Ohio who maintains a database of police officers who have been arrested — the case against Gonzales is uncommon but not unprecedented.
Prosecutors in Florida attempted to similarly charge a law enforcement officer for his response to the 2018 shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida. Seventeen were killed when a gunman opened fire that day, Feb. 14, 2018, in Parkland.
A jury in 2023 acquitted Scot Peterson, the former Broward County sheriff’s deputy, after he was charged with child neglect and culpable negligence for his alleged inaction following the shooting.
Jeffrey Epstein is seen in this image released by the Department of Justice in Washington, December 19, 2025 (U.S. Justice Department)
(WASHINGTON) — A federal judge in New York on Wednesday declined to appoint a special master to oversee the Justice Department’s production of the remaining Epstein files, despite “legitimate concerns” about whether the DOJ is faithfully complying with the Epstein Files Transparency Act.
The Dec. 19 deadline the law imposed for the release of all files related to the late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein has come and gone, and at least two members of Congress say the Justice Department is still in possession of as many as two million potentially relevant documents.
Federal prosecutors in the Southern District of New York said last week they’re still reviewing and redacting material from the investigations into Epstein and co-conspirator Ghislaine Maxwell to comply with court orders about protecting victims.
Several Epstein victims wrote letters supporting legislators’ push for a neutral monitor.
In his opinion released Wednesday, U.S. District Judge Paul Engelmayer said the “questions raised by the Representatives and the victims are undeniably important and timely” and raise “raise legitimate concerns about whether DOJ is faithfully complying with federal law.”
However, the judge concluded he lacks jurisdiction to supervise the Justice Department’s compliance with the Epstein Act.
“The Representatives have not articulated how the criminal statutes under which Maxwell was charged would empower the Court to enforce the EFTA,” Engelmayer wrote.
The opinion also said the members of Congress — Thomas Massie, R-Ky., and Ro Khanna, D-Calif. — have no role in the matter.
“The Representatives do not seek to opine on any live issue before the Court,” Engelmayer wrote. “And the appointment of a neutral to supervise DOJ’s compliance with the EFTA is far afield from any matter pending before the Court.”
Congress passed the Epstein Files Transparency Act in November, following blowback the Trump administration received seeking the release of materials related to their probe of Epstein, who died by suicide in a New York jail in 2019. President Donald Trump signed the act into law on Nov. 19.
Materials released to date include a trove of photographs and court records, including a complaint to the FBI about Epstein that was filed years before he was first investigated for child sex abuse, and documents containing previously unknown details about plans for Epstein’s 2019 arrest.
The files released so far, however, have yet to show evidence of wrongdoing on the part of famous, powerful men, against the expectations of many of those who have been pushing for the files’ release.
(NEW YORK) — The South is bracing for a potentially major winter storm this weekend, impacting Texas, Oklahoma, Louisiana, Arkansas, Mississippi, Alabama and Tennessee.
The storm is still several days away, so exact timing and locations are not yet clear. But as of now, more than 30 million people are under a winter storm watch, from Dallas to Little Rock, Arkansas, to Huntsville, Alabama, to Nashville, Tennessee.
Snow is expected to develop over the Plains on Friday and a wintry mix of sleet and freezing rain is forecast to the south. The storm will become more widespread Saturday morning.
Texas Gov. Greg Abbott said on Tuesday he was activating state emergency response resources ahead of the storm, saying the freezing rain, sleet and snow “could create hazardous travel conditions into the weekend and cause impacts to infrastructure.”
The system will reach the East Coast by Sunday and impacts could linger there into Monday. But the specific timing and what to expect is still unclear.
US President Donald Trump, during the World Economic Forum (WEF) in Davos, Switzerland, on Wednesday, Jan. 21, 2026. The annual Davos gathering of political leaders, top executives and celebrities runs from Jan. 19-23. (Photographer: Krisztian Bocsi/Bloomberg via Getty Images)
(DAVOS, Switzerland) — President Donald Trump, speaking Wednesday at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland amid heightened tensions with Europe, notably ruled out using military force to acquire Greenland.
“We probably won’t get anything unless I decide to use excessive strength and force where we would be, frankly, unstoppable. But I won’t do that,” Trump said.
“I don’t have to use force. I don’t want to use force. I won’t use force,” Trump said.
Still, Trump said no other country can defend Greenland but the United States and said he is seeking “immediate negotiations to once again discuss the acquisition of Greenland by the United States.”
“I have tremendous respect for both the people of Greenland and the people of Denmark, tremendous respect. But every NATO ally has an obligation to be able to defend their own territory, and the fact is, no nation or group of nations is in any position to be able to secure Greenland other than the United States. We’re a great power,” Trump said.
This is a developing story. Please check back for updates.
People, including a man holding a placard that shows Greenland covered in an American flag, Xed out and that reads: Our Land, Not Yours”, gather to march in protest against U.S. President Donald Trump and his announced intent to acquire Greenland on January 17, 2026 in Nuuk, Greenland. (Sean Gallup/Getty Images)
(LONDON) — Thousands of people thronged the snowy streets of the Greenlandic capital of Nuuk on Saturday to have their say on a transatlantic crisis that has shaken the 76-year-old NATO alliance.
“Greenland for Greenlanders,” “Our land, not yours,” and “Yankee go home” were among the signs held aloft by marchers, accompanied by a plethora of red-and-white Greenlandic flags.
The 56,000 Greenlanders who inhabit the world’s largest island — which is an autonomous territory within the Kingdom of Denmark — have found themselves at the center of a geopolitical storm, as U.S. President Donald Trump wages an escalating pressure campaign to acquire the territory despite intense opposition from Greenlanders, Danes and America’s NATO allies.
The message of the weekend march in Nuuk was clear. But many Greenlanders fear that their voices are being lost in the transatlantic furor, Pele Broberg — the leader of the pro-independence Naleraq party — told ABC News.
“We are currently being caught in broader political conflicts driven by opposition to Donald Trump, because we are just a stepping stone between the Europeans and the Americans,” Broberg said.
“Everybody is busy and stepping on Greenland to make a point that Donald Trump is a bad man,” he added. “I’m not a pro-Trump guy. I’m not pro anything with the U.S. with regards to how they’re handling this situation.”
‘Territories don’t have any rights’ Naleraq is the second-largest party and the official opposition in Greenland’s parliament. While Greenlandic political parties have agreed on independence as a shared eventual goal, Naleraq is widely seen as pushing for a more immediate breakaway from Denmark. The party is also considered by observers to be the most open to U.S. cooperation.
Broberg was clear that he considers Copenhagen at least partly responsible for the crisis engulfing Greenland. “The problem is that everybody talked about the Greenlandic people without the Greenlandic people,” he said.
Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen has repeatedly said that Greenland belongs to Greenlanders and that no decision on the island’s future can be made without their agreement. But Broberg said that the framing of Trump’s bid to acquire Greenland as an attack on Denmark has sown confusion.
“Either Greenland truly belongs to the Greenlandic people, or it is treated as part of the Danish Kingdom. In practice, it cannot be both,” he said. Copenhagen, he said, “has managed to marginalize the Greenlandic government … They have managed to make it a matter of the Danish Kingdom and not the Greenlandic people.”
“Territories don’t have any rights — peoples have rights,” Broberg added.
Broberg said he believes there is “no doubt” that the Danish government is using the current crisis to undermine the goal of Greenlandic independence, using the threat of U.S. domination as a foil.
The Greenlandic government — currently led by the Demokraatit party — and Prime Minister Jens-Frederik Nielsen have made clear they have no intention of joining the U.S.
“If we have to choose between the United States and Denmark here and now, we choose Denmark,” Nielsen said during a press conference earlier this month. “Greenland does not want to be owned by the United States. Greenland does not want to be governed by the United States. Greenland does not want to be part of the United States.”
The next general election in Greenland is scheduled for 2029, the year Trump’s second term ends.
Amid Trump’s threats, the leaders of all five political parties holding seats in Greenland’s parliament also released a joint statement. “We do not want to be Americans, we do not want to be Danes, we want to be Greenlanders,” they said.
A bipartisan U.S. Congressional delegation traveled to Denmark last weekend in a bid to reassure Danes and Greenlanders of their support. Delegation leader Sen. Chris Coons, a Delaware Democrat, said at an event in Copenhagen, “I hope that the people of the Kingdom of Denmark do not abandon their faith in the American people.”
Broberg, whose party placed second in last year’s elections with 24% of the vote, suggested there had been a damaging lack of communication between Nuuk and Washington.
“The problem is that they are reacting out of panic rather than having a clear strategy,” Broberg said of the Greenlandic government. “I encouraged them last year, before the elections, to actually go to speak to the U.S. representatives. But they didn’t want to do that because they felt insulted by the way they were talked about.”
‘This started with Trump’ Trump first raised the prospect of acquiring the minerals-rich island in his first term. Frederiksen at that time dismissed the proposal as “absurd.”
President Joe Biden’s administration also showed a keen interest in Greenland, though it engaged in a softer approach. Secretary of State Antony Blinken visited the island in 2021 and told reporters he was there “because the United States deeply values our partnership and wants to make it even stronger.”
His trip followed bilateral successes in 2020 — before Trump left office — that saw the U.S. reopen its Nuuk consulate, expand cooperation at the American Thule Air Base, since renamed as the Pituffik Space Base, and agree to a new economic collaboration strategy.
Broberg said it is clear that Greenland is part of the long-term, bipartisan U.S. strategic picture. But the crisis over the island’s sovereignty, he said, “started with Donald Trump.”
“We’re not a pro-Trump or pro-U.S. party,” he said. “We’re a pro-Greenland party. We don’t tolerate anything of what came out of the American president’s mouth with regards to Greenland and its people’s rights.”
Broberg, a former Greenlandic foreign minister, urged dialogue. “You have to work this problem, not become the problem,” he said.
Still, Broberg acknowledged that the situation “has escalated to a point where simple solutions are no longer available,” citing the brewing transatlantic trade war. “I don’t see a way out of this that doesn’t involve an election in Greenland.”
Broberg said Naleraq foresees a free association agreement with Denmark twinned with a defense-and security-agreement with the U.S., under which Washington would gain exclusive rights to military operations on the island.
“Under the current defense agreement, the U.S. does not hold full military exclusivity over Greenland,” he said, referring to the 1951 Greenland Defense Agreement that gave the U.S. military access across the island. “That’s why you can see that Donald Trump looked at the stationing of troops this week as an escalation, as a provocation.”
Broberg also said Naleraq has discussed the formation of a Greenlandic coast guard — with personnel potentially numbering in the low thousands — to help guard Greenland’s 27,000-mile coastline.
Trump has repeatedly dismissed suggestions that a larger U.S. military footprint on Greenland can address his purported concerns over Russian and Chinese presence in the High North. “I could put a lot of soldiers there right now if I want. But you need more than that. You need ownership,” he told reporters aboard Air Force One this month.
Nonetheless, Broberg said his party is “genuinely interested” in working with the U.S. on security and trade. “We are, from a political point of view, looking to be globalist. We are a free trade country. We don’t impose tariffs on anybody, no matter what,” he said.
Asked if he was currently in touch with the Trump administration, Broberg replied, “Not at all.”
Trump has been dismissive of Greenland’s prime minister. After Nielsen said the island would not join the U.S., Trump told reporters, “That’s their problem. I disagree with him. I don’t know who he is. Don’t know anything about him, but that’s going to be a big problem for him.”
Subs in the fjords Trump’s reasoning for wanting “complete and total control” of Greenland is the purported threat posed by Russia and China in the Arctic.
NATO allies have said they agree that regional military capabilities and readiness should be bolstered. Last year, Copenhagen announced a $6.5 billion Arctic defense package in response to U.S. criticism that it had failed to adequately protect Greenland.
And last week, eight NATO nations sent small contingents of troops to Greenland for what they said were military exercises. In an interview early this week, Broberg was fiercely critical of what he described as that “very stupid” move, saying he felt it would be interpreted as “an escalation” by the U.S.
Broberg also said it was a mistake to send the troops to Nuuk and Greenland’s west coast. “The Russians are on the east coast, they’re in the northeast,” he said.
“If they really wanted to placate the US … they should put them on the northeast coast where nobody lives,” Broberg added.
Asked whether the Russian-Chinese threat to Greenland was genuine or concocted, Broberg replied, “I think the truth is somewhere in between … You don’t have smoke without some fire.”
But he noted that hunting parties — traveling over the frozen terrain quickly and quietly on dogsleds, a mode of transport Trump appeared to mock when criticizing Danish military capabilities in Greenland — “have, on occasion, reported seeing submarines near the coast or fjords.”
“We have never been told what kind of subs there are. But the presumption is Russian subs. So there is some truth to it. But if it’s crawling with them, or if it’s one every 10 years — I have no idea.”
