Bloomberg Talks

Episode: Former US Ambassador to China Nicholas Burns Talks Push for Greenland
Date: January 8, 2026
Host: Bloomberg News Team
Guest: Nicholas Burns – Former U.S. Ambassador to NATO and China; Professor, Harvard Kennedy School

Overview

This episode explores President Trump's controversial push regarding Greenland—ranging from military threats to speculation about natural resource interests. Nicholas Burns, leveraging his extensive diplomatic experience, discusses the strategic importance of Greenland, the shockwaves the U.S. administration’s position has sent through NATO, and the broader implications for U.S.-Europe relations and great power competition in the Arctic. The conversation blends geopolitical insight with an urgent call for traditional alliance diplomacy over unilateral threats.

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. US Rhetoric and NATO Stability

• Potential End of NATO: Burns emphasizes the unprecedented gravity of American officials discussing military action against Denmark, a NATO ally, over Greenland.
  • “Certainly an attack by the United States against Denmark over Greenland would end NATO as we know it. It’s been unthinkable since NATO was created in 1949 that the United States or any other NATO country would attack a fellow member.” – Burns [00:41]
• Multiple high-ranking U.S. officials have publicly floated “force on the table,” shocking allies.
  • “You can imagine how that’s gone down in Denmark and in Europe... We just have to treat that ally respectfully.” – Burns [01:42]

2. The Danish Position and Alternative Paths

• Denmark welcomes greater American military and economic presence in Greenland without threats or coercion.
  • “The Danish prime minister... welcomes a further, bigger American military presence on Greenland. They welcome the Danes American private investment or government investment in rare earth mining.” – Burns [01:29]
• Diplomacy over confrontation: Upcoming high-level meetings in Washington could ease tensions.

3. Strategic Importance of Greenland

• Burns provides the military context: proximity to Russia, the growing ambitions of China in the Arctic, and the importance of maintaining NATO cohesion.
  • “Greenland is strategically important. If you think about Greenland’s geographic position vis a vis the Russian Federation... and China’s ambitions as they call themselves a near Arctic power.” – Burns [03:14]
• Stresses building military presence “with assistance of Denmark”—not through division.

4. Resource Motives and Legal Boundaries

• Speculation: Is the U.S. interested in Greenland’s resources for itself?
  • “That would be larceny. That would be highway robbery. It’s unthinkable that the United States would want to live in a world where there are no rules and that, in fact, we try to exploit the resources of NATO members against their will.” – Burns [05:46]
• Contrasts Venezuela (no alliance, illegitimate government) with Denmark (longstanding ally, sovereign).

5. Great Power Competition in the Arctic

• Russia seeks dominance in the Arctic; China increases presence as a “near Arctic power.”
  • “Certainly the Russians are acting and planning that they want to be the dominant power in the Arctic. And obviously we need to counter that... The Chinese are a different case. They’re not an Arctic power. But they believe they are.” – Burns [07:23]
• American strength comes from working with allies, not unilaterally:
  • “We are always stronger working with our treaty allies to contain Russian and Chinese power than trying to do it on our own.” – Burns [08:35]

6. China’s Leverage and Latin American Dynamics

• China’s influence in South America outweighs the United States—cause for strategic concern.
  • “The Chinese want to continue to be the major trade partner of South America... Our aim should be much stronger American investment... to counteract what I think is a very negative dynamic.” – Burns [09:21]
• Chinese legal maneuvers and economic retaliation are possible tools.

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• End of Alliance Warning:
  “An attack by the United States against Denmark over Greenland would end NATO as we know it.”
  — Nicholas Burns [00:41]

• Respect for Alliances:
  “We can get what we want without these really colossal threats, colossally ignorant threats against a NATO ally.”
  — Nicholas Burns [01:38]

• On Resource Grabs:
  “That would be larceny. That would be highway robbery.”
  — Nicholas Burns [05:46]

• Importance of Diplomacy:
  “The best way to do that is not to dissolve NATO and break NATO apart by an American military invasion, but to go back to Greenland, what the Danes establish a much stronger American military presence.”
  — Nicholas Burns [04:21]

• Power of Partnership:
  “We are always stronger working with our treaty allies to contain Russian and Chinese power than trying to do it on our own or in this case, threatening the use of military force.”
  — Nicholas Burns [08:35]

Timestamps for Important Segments

• [00:41] – Risk to NATO if US-Denmark military confrontation over Greenland occurs
• [01:29] – Denmark’s openness to stronger US presence and resource investment
• [03:14] – Greenland’s military significance versus Russia and China
• [05:46] – Ethical and legal boundaries for US actions in Greenland
• [07:23] – Summary of Arctic power dynamics and US strategy
• [08:35] – Value of alliance-based approaches
• [09:21] – China’s ascendancy in Latin America and related US strategic concerns

Tone & Structure

Burns’ tone is measured but urgent, advocating strongly for diplomacy over threats, emphasizing alliance obligations, and outright rejecting notions of aggressive resource grabs. He aligns US security interests with respectful partnership and multilateral cooperation, warning of the catastrophic consequences of military escalation with an ally.

This episode is essential listening for anyone interested in NATO cohesion, US foreign policy, the resurgence of great power competition in the Arctic, and the fragility of long-standing alliances under current geopolitical strains.