President Donald Trump on Wednesday stunned allies by abruptly canceling his proposed tariff measures against European partners, signalling a tactical retreat after he and NATO’s leadership agreed on what was described as a “framework of a future deal” on Arctic security. The move came just hours after Trump had doubled down on his controversial assertion that the United States should “get Greenland, including right, title and ownership,” even as he insisted that military force was not his preferred option.

The sudden about-face underscored Trump’s transactional approach to diplomacy, in which pressure is applied dramatically and then withdrawn when negotiations appear to yield movement. Speaking ahead of the World Economic Forum in Davos, Trump framed the tariff rollback as part of a broader understanding with NATO on safeguarding the Arctic, a region gaining strategic importance due to melting ice, emerging shipping routes and great-power competition.

In an extraordinary address at the forum, Trump defended his Greenland remarks by casting them as modest in historical context. He described the vast Arctic island as “cold and poorly located,” while arguing that the United States had repeatedly underwritten Europe’s security. Recalling America’s role in World War II and the decades-long burden of NATO commitments, Trump said seeking territory was “a very small ask compared to what we have given them for many, many decades.”

At the same time, the president leaned into his trademark bravado. “We probably won’t get anything unless I decide to use excessive strength and force, where we would be frankly unstoppable,” he said, before quickly adding that he neither needed nor wanted to use force. The remarks, while disavowing military action, were widely interpreted as an attempt to unsettle allies and expand Washington’s bargaining leverage.

Trump’s rhetoric highlighted ongoing tensions within NATO over sovereignty, burden-sharing and strategic priorities. While alliance leaders moved to downplay any suggestion that Greenland’s status was negotiable, the episode illustrated how Trump uses spectacle and brinkmanship to shape negotiations, often blurring the line between provocation and policy.

President Donald Trump on Wednesday stunned allies by abruptly canceling his proposed tariff measures against European partners, signalling a tactical retreat after he and NATO’s leadership agreed on what was described as a “framework of a future deal” on Arctic security. The move came just hours after Trump had doubled down on his controversial assertion that the United States should “get Greenland, including right, title and ownership,” even as he insisted that military force was not his preferred option.

The sudden about-face underscored Trump’s transactional approach to diplomacy, in which pressure is applied dramatically and then withdrawn when negotiations appear to yield movement. Speaking ahead of the World Economic Forum in Davos, Trump framed the tariff rollback as part of a broader understanding with NATO on safeguarding the Arctic, a region gaining strategic importance due to melting ice, emerging shipping routes and great-power competition.

In an extraordinary address at the forum, Trump defended his Greenland remarks by casting them as modest in historical context. He described the vast Arctic island as “cold and poorly located,” while arguing that the United States had repeatedly underwritten Europe’s security. Recalling America’s role in World War II and the decades-long burden of NATO commitments, Trump said seeking territory was “a very small ask compared to what we have given them for many, many decades.”

At the same time, the president leaned into his trademark bravado. “We probably won’t get anything unless I decide to use excessive strength and force, where we would be frankly unstoppable,” he said, before quickly adding that he neither needed nor wanted to use force. The remarks, while disavowing military action, were widely interpreted as an attempt to unsettle allies and expand Washington’s bargaining leverage.

Trump’s rhetoric highlighted ongoing tensions within NATO over sovereignty, burden-sharing and strategic priorities. While alliance leaders moved to downplay any suggestion that Greenland’s status was negotiable, the episode illustrated how Trump uses spectacle and brinkmanship to shape negotiations, often blurring the line between provocation and policy.