5 points learned after the US and Denmark met at the White House

A high-stakes meeting between the United States, Denmark and Greenland over the future of the Arctic island ended without much progress, fueling concerns about the prospects for a short-term solution.

The meeting at the White House on Wednesday between U.S. Vice President J.D. Vance, U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Danish Foreign Minister Lars Lökke Rasmussen and Greenland’s Vivian Motzfeldt lasted about an hour.

Denmark’s Rasmussen said the meeting was “candid but constructive”, but added that US President Donald Trump’s repeated threats to take control of Greenland were “totally unacceptable”.

CNBC highlights five key takeaways from the White House showdown.

For some, the White House meeting certainly accomplished something important. The United States, Denmark, and Greenland agreed to establish a high-level working group to determine the future direction of the Danish Dominion.

Penny Nurse, senior vice president at the Washington-based think tank GMF, said by doing so the three countries avoided the worst-case scenario.

“Greenland’s strategic importance has made it a focus of sustained U.S. interest, including periodic acquisition drives. But Greenlanders are clear: they value deep ties with Denmark, NATO, and Europe, and do not see their future as part of the United States,” Naas told CNBC via email.

“Bridging this gap between the US government, which still shows a desire to ‘own’ Greenland, and the Greenlanders, who are determined to self-determination, will require creativity and a realistic recognition of the concerns of all sides,” she added.

Rasmussen said the working group will meet over the next few weeks to find a compromise. He said Denmark and Greenland were open to the possibility of the United States opening more military bases on the island, but insisted there were some “red lines” that the United States could not cross.

Hours before Wednesday’s meeting began, President Trump said anything other than Greenland becoming part of the United States was “unacceptable.”

Later, he reiterated this position to reporters in the Oval Office, saying, “We need Greenland for national security.”

Guntram Wolff, a senior fellow at the Brussels-based Bruegel think tank, said Trump’s push to take control of Greenland was seen as “totally unacceptable” by Europe and raised questions about the health of the NATO military alliance.

“If the president of the United States says he can only protect what he owns, what he’s basically saying is that he can’t protect Europe under any circumstances because he doesn’t own it, right?” Wolf told CNBC’s “Early Edition of Europe” on Thursday. “This means that NATO Article 5, the US president’s support for European security, can no longer be taken for granted,” he added.

NATO’s Article V mutual defense clause means that an attack against one NATO member is considered an attack against all allies. Both the United States and Denmark, which is responsible for the defense of Greenland, are NATO members.

Trump, who has long coveted control of the mineral-rich island, has repeatedly said in recent weeks that only the United States can counter the alleged threats from Russia and China to Greenland.

“The problem is, if Russia or China wanted to take over Greenland, there’s nothing Denmark can do, but there’s everything we can do,” Trump said Wednesday, adding that they can’t rely on Copenhagen to defend Greenland.

Marisol Maddox, a senior fellow at Dartmouth College’s Arctic Institute, said it’s true that Russia and China are deepening and broadening areas of cooperation in the Arctic, including military and dual use of infrastructure and research.

“But we’re not seeing this activity in Greenland. We’re seeing joint Russian and Chinese military activity off the coast of Alaska, which remains under-invested by the United States,” Maddox told CNBC in an email.

“Since President Trump first expressed concern about Greenland’s security, Denmark has stepped up and announced game-changing multibillion-dollar defense investments,” Maddox said.

“Through the cooperation of allied nations, we succeeded in halting predatory investments by Chinese state-owned enterprises in Greenland and other parts of the Arctic,” it added.

At Denmark’s request, several NATO countries this week confirmed plans to send military personnel to Greenland as part of a joint exercise called Operation Arctic Endurance.

Ahead of the White House meeting, Denmark announced plans to strengthen its military presence in Greenland, saying activities could include guarding national infrastructure, deploying fighter jets and conducting naval operations.

Germany, France, Sweden and Norway have all confirmed plans to participate in shows of support for both Copenhagen and Nuuk.

“As part of the NATO alliance, strengthening the defense and security of Greenland and its surroundings is a top priority for the Greenlandic government, and this will be achieved through close cooperation with our NATO allies,” Greenland’s Motzfeldt said in a statement.

Looking ahead, analysts were struggling to assess the possibilities for resolving the conflict.

Rasmus Brun Pedersen, an associate professor at Denmark’s Aarhus University, said he expects Denmark and its NATO allies to increase their military presence in Greenland as part of convincing the Trump administration that they are taking Arctic security seriously.

“There’s going to be a major NATO buildup in the region, and hopefully we’ll be able to say to the United States that there was a security concern, look, we responded,” Pedersen told CNBC’s “Squawk Box Europe” on Thursday.

“And I hope that the United States will say, ‘We didn’t have a military before, but President Trump was able to force a reluctant NATO ally to increase its presence in the region, so that’s a victory.'”

But Pedersen warned that the U.S. position shows that this strategy is likely to have an untenable outcome. “So where is the compromise? That’s a good question.”