Europe must confront the end of Pax Americana, writes Public Affairs Manager, Joe Meighan.

International politics moves in eras. For decades, Europe’s security rested on a stable assumption: that the United States would remain a predictable guarantor of the post-war order. That assumption no longer holds. Recent US actions towards Greenland mark a turning point that Europe and the UK can no longer afford to ignore.

Greenland is not an abstract territory on a map. It is part of the Kingdom of Denmark, a sovereign European state and a Nato ally. Yet repeated statements and signals from President Donald Trump, treating Greenland as a transactional asset rather than sovereign territory, represent a deeply troubling departure from the norms that underpin European security. Explicit or implicit pressure on Greenland is not a diplomatic eccentricity; it is an aggressive act that undermines the alliance’s solidarity and international law.

This matters because the United States already enjoys extensive military access and cooperation in Greenland through Denmark and Nato. There is no legitimate security gap to be filled. What is at stake instead is strategic control over the Arctic: its shipping routes, energy reserves and critical raw materials. As climate change accelerates Arctic access, Greenland has become central to global competition. Attempts by a supposed ally to strong-arm a European territory in pursuit of resource and strategic advantage must be recognised for what they are - a challenge to Europe’s sovereignty and security.

The lesson is stark. Aggression in the 21st century does not always arrive in the form of invading armies. It increasingly takes the form of coercion, pressure, leverage and the casual erosion of sovereignty by powerful states that believe rules no longer apply to them. Europe has seen this behaviour from Russia and China, and it should alarm us profoundly to see similar logic emerging from the United States.

For Europe, this confirms a reality that has been building for years: our safety and security now lie primarily with ourselves. Look at Trump’s lack of commitment to support Ukraine with a security guarantee, and look at his approach to Greenland now. The transatlantic relationship remains important, but it can no longer be the foundation on which European defence is built. Strategic autonomy is not anti-American; it is pro-European resilience. It is the recognition that Europe must be capable of defending its territory, its resources and its democratic values, regardless of political volatility in Washington.

This has immediate implications for the UK. Brexit did not change geography, shared threats or shared responsibilities. Britain faces the same challenges as its European neighbours: energy insecurity, cyber-attacks, disinformation, pressure on supply chains and intensifying competition for critical resources. Yet outside the EU, the UK has weakened its own influence and resilience at precisely the moment when unity matters most.

Closer cooperation with the European Union is no longer sufficient. The scale of today’s international crisis demands deeper alignment than that. Participation in common defence procurement, secure supply chains and coordinated sanctions requires full access for the UK to the EU single market and to shared European decision-making, because security and economic strength are inseparable. Without the efficiencies and protections of the single market, Europe and Britain remain vulnerable to external coercion.

This is why the debate must now move beyond technical cooperation to strategic intent. Single market membership is not a concession; it is a safeguard and a peace project. And in the face of an increasingly unstable world, where even allies may behave aggressively, European Union membership must once again be recognised as a legitimate and necessary objective for the UK.
A stronger, more unified Europe does not weaken Nato. On the contrary, it strengthens the alliance by ensuring it is not dependent on the political direction of any single capital. European defence capability, European economic integration and European political unity are the foundations of credible security.

At European Movement UK, we have long argued that sovereignty in the modern world is exercised collectively or not at all. A threat to one European state, whether from Russia, China or indeed the United States, must be treated as a threat to all of Europe. That includes threats to Greenland. The UK government must not continue to mute its response in the hope of currying favour with the White House. Solidarity with our European neighbours must come first.

The era of complacency is over. Pax Americana has ended, not with a declaration, but with a series of actions that reveal a harsher, more transactional world. Europe can either respond divided and diminished, or united and resilient.

For Britain, the choice is clear. Our future security lies in Europe. Our prosperity lies in the single market and our influence lies in rejoining the European Union. European defence is our defence, and Europe’s future must be secured together.