U.S. Invasion of Greenland: Military Power, NATO Response & Global Consequences

U.S. Invasion of Greenland: How NATO and the United States Stack Up Militarily

It is safe to say this is a scenario few would have ever thought they had to play out, but recent global events has the world at least considering the notion. President Donald Trump has promised that Greenland would be coming under United States rule and initially indicated that a military option was being considered. Later at the Davos economic forum in Europe, Trump affirmed that the United States would be taking control, but he would not use the military. It was then announced that a deal was made which included the infrastructure to take control of Greenland. While this story is still developing by the day, what is clear is that the global world order is being turned upside down. As such, every norm and preconceived notion about global affairs is being brought into question. Which brings us to a question as to what a military confrontation between the United States and NATO would look like if a deal cannot be reached. In this article we’re going to run the numbers and take a look at a potential conflict the world never saw coming. We’re not going to do war games as if we are strategic military experts. Rather, we’re going to look at the objective data and make reasonable conclusions.

The United States vs NATO by the Numbers

We’re just talking numbers here and depending on the sources used, the numbers can vary a bit. However, this should give you a good idea of what you are looking at on day one. The United States Military has an active force of about 1.3 million service members with another 800,000 in the reserve or national guard. Meanwhile, the rest of NATO has about 2 million on active duty with another 2.6 in reserve. Analysis: NATO holds a 2:1 advantage over the United States in military personnel. 

That being said, let’s talk about the numbers in more detail. The U.S. has nearly twice the amount of 5th gen fighters than the rest of NATO combined. The U.S. has four times the amount of aircraft carriers over the rest of NATO combined. The U.S. has 5,000 nuclear warheads and the rest of NATO, U.K. and France, have 500. The U.S. has three times the nuclear submarines, four times the satellites, three times the aerial refuelers, and, when it comes to strategic bombers, the rest of NATO boasts a fleet of zero. 

The U.S. Invasion of Greenland

In terms of the U.S. taking control of Greenland, there is little NATO could do to stop it. Any invasion would be successful on the first day and wouldn’t require a massive amount of troops. They could send in one battalion of Marines by sea or one battalion of paratroopers by air and it wouldn’t matter. Existing NATO forces on the island would do well to not fire a single shot and simply hand over the keys.

The question then becomes how NATO would respond if it wanted to take back the island. Greenland is 1,600 miles across the North Atlantic from the closest point in the U.K. and further from the rest of Europe. This is how far the majority of European NATO troops would have to travel to engage Greenland. Iceland is only about 200 miles away at the closest point which means it could be used as a staging ground, but would be within range of the full U.S. naval and aerial arsenal. Bottom line, getting enough troops across this distance to dislodge the U.S. forces or reinforce any forces during the initial invasion would prove difficult if not impossible. 

The United States Navy Would Safeguard Greenland

As it pertains to the 1,600 mile gap that most of NATO forces would have to bridge, the fact that those miles are over chilling Atlantic waters gives the U.S. a distinct advantage. The U.S. boasts 11 nuclear aircraft carriers while NATO holds only 2 by the U.K. and 1 by France. Meanwhile the range of an F-35 is somewhere between 600 and 700 miles. The United States can blanket that 1,600 mile gap with airpower the entire way. 

NATO does boast some impressive surface fleet ships and submarines, but nowhere near the number of U.S. forces. This means that even without American airpower in play, NATO would still struggle to reach Greenland. The U.S. also holds a significant advantage over Europe when it comes to satellite technology and numbers. It is highly unlikely that we wouldn’t see an armada coming and would be able to engage at the time and location of the United States choosing. 

The Problem of Canada During an American Invasion of Greenland

Canada shares a 5,500 mile border with the United States that is poorly guarded by either side at the moment. Canada is a member of NATO and if Article 5 were invoked, it would be obligated to come to the defense of Greenland. The only problem is that the Canadian military recently played out the scenario where the U.S. invades Canada and the result is that Canada lasts maybe two days. 

It is possible that Canadian naval and air forces flee to Europe similar to how French equipment made its way to the U.K. after the fall of France in World War 2. The only problem is that they still have to cross the Atlantic which would be full of U.S. forces. Canada does become an inconvenient problem for the United States in a conflict with NATO, but not a problem that couldn’t be easily solved. Canada would have a decision to make and coming to the defense of Greenland would not be the easy choice. 

NATO Strategy Becomes One of Containment

If NATO cannot retake Greenland from the United States, then it is likely that their strategy becomes one of containment. That is to safeguard the rest of Europe or lure the United States into the European theatre where the logistics favor the rest of NATO. The 2:1 manpower lead becomes a significant advantage if the war is fought on NATO turf. 

Historically, manpower has won the war over the long-term when a nation refuses to be conquered. The United States devastated the Taliban in 2001 after 9-11 and removed them from power. After 20 years of refusing to be conquered, the Taliban is back in power despite the technological advantage of the United States. 

It is likely that Europe would not attempt to retake Greenland and simply accept it as a loss. However, they would begin the process of militarizing Europe and start getting ready for the long-term. A war with the rest of NATO would be unpopular in the United States and war weariness would set in at some point. Meanwhile, European nations would see this as a righteous cause. It’s what we’ve witnessed in Ukraine where the technologically and numerically superior Russian army should have won. A refusal to be conquered is a powerful force. 

Russia and China Would Immediately Exploit the Conflict

Once the shooting starts between the United States and Europe, one can be certain that Russia and China would seize the opportunity. There would be no better time for China to invade Taiwan and there would be no better time for Russia to expand the war into the Baltic states. It’s a now or never moment for those two nations when the U.S. and Europe are in military conflict. 

Europe would be less likely to send arms to Ukraine when they need them to defend against the United States. The United States navy would be less likely to sail towards Taiwan when they are fighting NATO in the Atlantic. The world would be segmented into hemispheres where the greatest power wins the day in their own backyard. The global reset of the world order would be complete and few could truly anticipate the long term outcomes. It would just not be the world we thought we knew. 

Preparing the Average American Family for the Unthinkable

Image source: MIRA Safety ®

While all of this is playing out, the average American family is going to have to come to terms with a notion we haven’t dealt with in a long time. The chaos of war could come home to roost. We simply don’t know what it is like to have foreign fighters or bombers over American territory dropping ordinance. Even if that is only for 2 by Canada, it is something for which we would need to prepare. 

A professional-grade gas mask becomes a much more reasonable purchase in times of war. That’s not a marketing strategy. Rather, it’s history. The United States has just not had to live this history in the modern era. It wouldn’t sound strange to Europeans or those in Asia where the global wars have been fought in the last 100 years. It’s just new to us and we would do well to prepare. 

It is a good idea to start having conversations with your family as to what you would do in such a scenario where a foreign military is active. If you live in Spokane, Washington and Canadian air forces took a swing at Fairchild Air Force Base to eliminate American aerial refueling planes. What would happen if foreign Naval forces approached Bangor Naval Base off the Pacific to reach the nuclear submarine base?

We don’t think NATO can win the war and take over the U.S. However, they can reach us and they can cause chaos. The citizens of Moscow likely never thought they’d see Ukrainian drones exploding in the nation’s capital, but it is happening. The first time American citizens hear air raid sirens go off it will be clear that the war has come home to roost. We prepare for the scenarios that we can imagine. We prepare for the scenarios we never thought possible. This is how you keep your family safe. What are the implications of a fight between the United States and Europe? Few know for sure, but in light of recent events, it is a question worth asking.