
Extraordinary Brussels summit underscores Europe’s red lines on sovereignty and economic coercion, while raising fresh questions about the future tone of transatlantic ties.
EU leaders used an extraordinary summit in Brussels to send a blunt message to US President Donald Trump: Europe expects “cordial and respectful” dealings, especially after a crisis in which Trump threatened punitive tariffs linked to Greenland. The immediate confrontation eased after a NATO-brokered Arctic security framework was announced, but European officials signalled they are ready to defend sovereignty and markets—potentially with the EU’s powerful Anti-Coercion Instrument.
Speaking after the emergency meeting, European Council President António Costa framed the issue as one of principle and method. “We believe that relationships between partners and allies should be managed in a cordial and respectful way,” he said, warning the EU would defend its interests “against any form of coercion,” according to a report by Euronews.
European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen struck a similar note, presenting unity as the bloc’s main leverage. She said the EU had been “successful” in pushing back against territorial claims by being “firm, non-escalatory and most importantly very united,” Euronews reported. At the same time, she urged Europeans to strengthen economic resilience, diversify supply chains and reduce vulnerabilities in key sectors.
A five-day crisis, then a fragile pause
The episode—described by European diplomats as a near-brink moment—was defused when Trump backtracked and opted for a longer-term arrangement on Arctic security brokered by NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte. Yet details of that framework have not been released, feeding suspicion in several capitals that the political clash could reappear in another form.
Leaders privately worried that a rapid escalation—tariffs met with countermeasures—could cause wider economic damage and complicate coordination on security priorities, including continued efforts to end Russia’s war against Ukraine. The relief in Brussels, however, came with a message: deterrence matters, and so do predictable rules between allies.
Greenland’s sovereignty and the people at the centre
Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen drew the clearest line. Denmark is prepared to discuss matters related to Greenland with Washington, she said, but sovereignty is “off the table”—a “red line”—and “our democratic rules cannot be discussed,” according to Euronews.
Greenland is an autonomous part of the Kingdom of Denmark with self-government established under the Self-Government Act framework. Any discussion about the island’s future also inevitably raises questions of democratic legitimacy and self-determination—especially for Greenlanders themselves, whose political agency can be sidelined when great-power competition dominates the headlines.
For EU officials, that is not a rhetorical point. If territorial questions are even hinted at through economic pressure, it touches core European norms: sovereignty, the rule of law, and the right of peoples to decide their own future without coercion.
The Anti-Coercion Instrument: Europe’s sharpest trade deterrent
Before Trump’s reversal, the Commission began preparing potential responses in case tariff threats moved from rhetoric to action. Among the options discussed was using the EU’s Anti-Coercion Instrument, which entered into force in late 2023 and is designed to deter and—if needed—counter third-country “economic coercion.”
The tool is intentionally broad. It can, in principle, target multiple areas at once—from trade in goods and services to investment flows, public procurement and intellectual property—while still operating within defined EU procedures and a “last resort” logic.
The European Times has previously explored how this mechanism is meant to work in practice and why it matters for Europe’s economic security in an earlier explainer on the Anti-Coercion Instrument. The same debate is now returning in real time: how to remain non-escalatory, but credible, when pressure tactics appear at the edge of allied diplomacy.
What this crisis reveals about the transatlantic relationship
At its core, the Brussels summit was less about tariffs alone and more about trust. EU leaders signalled they want to preserve transatlantic cooperation, but not at the cost of normalising threats—territorial or economic—against a member state and its autonomous territory.
The crisis has also revived a longer-running discussion in Europe: strategic resilience. Von der Leyen’s call to diversify supply chains and reinforce “economic power” fits a broader EU shift toward reducing single-point dependencies, alongside debates on industrial policy, defence cooperation, and the balance between openness and protection.
As The European Times has reported in other contexts, Europe’s push to deepen its own capacity—whether in security or industrial policy—has become a recurring theme in Brussels. (See, for example, our coverage on strengthening defence cooperation in European politics.)
