Donald Trump’s remarks regarding Greenland are being used by a sophisticated network of Russian state media and pro-Kremlin media outlets across Europe to promote Moscow’s strategic objectives, including weakening NATO unity, downplaying Russian aggression in Ukraine, and spreading narratives of Western hypocrisy and decline.
Few observers foresaw that U.S. President Donald Trump’s comments would serve as fodder for a global disinformation campaign when he revived his interest in acquiring Greenland in early 2025. However, a well-coordinated network of media outlets throughout Europe, from Slovakia to France, from Hungary to Sweden, seized upon Trump’s territorial aspirations in order to promote narratives that support Russian strategic objectives. These sources include European websites that present themselves as independent voices offering various points of view, as well as overtly Russian state media like RT and Sputnik. Together, they have transformed the Greenland controversy into a multipurpose propaganda tool.
This analysis examines how Russian state media and pro-Russian outlets across Europe have weaponized Trump’s Greenland rhetoric. The complexity of this operation lies in its scale and coordination: a network spanning at least a dozen countries, all amplifying variations of the same core messages while presenting themselves as diverse, independent sources. The campaign accomplishes a number of interconnected goals, including demonizing European institutions as hypocritical colonial powers, relativizing Russian territorial aggression by drawing comparisons with American actions, portraying NATO as weak and internally divided, and promoting visions of the collapse of Western civilization.
Narrative 1: “The Alliance will shatter” – NATO’s existential crisis
The most prominent narrative promoted across Russian and pro-Russian media presents Trump’s Greenland ambitions as a crisis that will destroy NATO from within. Russian state media RT has been particularly active in promoting this angle, reporting that Trump’s demands created a situation “particularly delicate for NATO, as having one member threaten to take another’s territory risks damaging the bloc’s credibility.” Yet in the same breath, RT notes that “informal discussions are underway at NATO to prepare a proposal for Trump” with the goal to “ease tensions.” The framing is deliberate: NATO isn’t defending a member state but accommodating American aggression.
- https://www.rt.com/news/612000-nato-greenland-security-trump/
This message resonates across European outlets. The Spanish site Rebelión published an analysis arguing that if the United States seizes Greenland “through coercion or progressive occupation, it will create a crisis that, according to Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen, will be a mortal blow to NATO.” The article emphasizes that “what was never foreseen was that the most powerful and hegemonic ally for seven decades could violate the sovereignty of another ally.”
- https://rebelion.org/groenlandia-es-la-punta-de-lanza-de-trump-para-destruir-la-otan-y-deslegitimar-a-europa/
The Slovenian outlet Insajder goes further, declaring that “Article 5, the collective defense clause, would lose its meaning. A coercive measure on Greenland would become the final and irreparable rupture.” The outlet draws a comparison that reveals the propaganda strategy at work: “Greenland is the contemporary ‘Sudeten crisis,’ and Trump is the ‘Führer’ of our time!” This equation of Trump with Hitler serves to delegitimize American power while ironically inverting the very criticisms leveled at Russian aggression.
- https://insajder.com/slovenija/kam-so-nas-pripeljali-politiki-kolaboranti-grenlandija-je-sodobna-sudetska-kriza-trump-pa
The Slovak outlet Slovanskenoviny reinforces this apocalyptic vision, reporting that “NATO allies held secret talks about sending North Atlantic Alliance troops to Greenland if Donald Trump annexed Greenland to the U.S.” This framing suggests the alliance is already planning for the scenario of American aggression against a member state.
- https://slovanskenoviny.sk/spojenci-v-nato-vedli-utajene-rozhovory-o-vyslani-vojaku-severoatlanticke-aliance-do-gronska-kdyby-donald-trump-anektoval-gronsko-k-usa/
Perhaps most revealing is how these outlets portray internal NATO dynamics to suggest the alliance is fracturing from within. Insajder reports that “NATO officials have begun withholding some intelligence from the U.S. because they fear it could fall into the hands of President Donald Trump” to support his Greenland efforts. The outlet quotes an unnamed NATO official’s personal anguish: “We used to drink beer together, but now it’s really strange. I fought alongside Americans in Iraq and Afghanistan. This is very disturbing in a way I never thought about.” Such emotionally charged anecdotes personalize the alleged NATO fracture, making abstract geopolitical tensions feel immediate and irreparable.
- https://insajder.com/svet/uradniki-nata-zaradi-spora-glede-grenlandije-skrivajo-informacije-pred-zda
The Polish outlet Magna Polonia frames the situation as a binary choice: “Trump may face a choice between annexing Greenland and preserving NATO’s integrity.” The implicit message is clear: NATO’s existence hangs by a thread, and American leadership views the alliance as expendable.
- https://www.magnapolonia.org/trump-rozwiaze-nato-by-anektowac-grenlandie/
What makes this narrative so valuable for Russian interests is obvious. If NATO cannot defend Denmark from the United States, how credible are its commitments to defend the Baltic states from Russia? The propaganda doesn’t need to be subtle. It simply needs to plant doubt.
Narrative 2: “American empire strikes back” – Neo-colonial expansion
Russian state media Sputnik has been instrumental in framing Trump’s Greenland ambitions within a historical continuum of American imperialism. An article titled “Does Greenland push mark a return to U.S. expansionism?” argues that “Trump’s efforts to acquire Greenland can be regarded as continuation of the U.S. tradition of territorial expansion that dates back to the 19th century purchase of Louisiana, Alaska and the annexation of Hawaii.” By linking contemporary policy to Manifest Destiny, Sputnik normalizes territorial expansion as an inherent American characteristic.
- https://sputnikglobe.com/20260118/does-greenland-push-mark-a-return-to-us-expansionism-1123481269.html
Sputnik columnist Pepe Escobar takes this further, writing that “The Empire of Chaos under Trump 2.0 may go Full Monroe Doctrine on top of the delirium of annexing Canada, Greenland, the Panama canal and any further unsuspecting latitudes.” His characterization of American foreign policy as “Terror and Genocide R Us” positions the United States as a rogue power threatening global stability.
- https://sputnikglobe.com/20250109/pepe-escobar-empire-of-chaos-reloaded-1121393521.html
European outlets amplify and adapt this message for local audiences. The Italian site Controinformazione describes Trump’s Greenland push as “unprecedented aggressiveness” that serves as “a warning to members of the Atlantic Alliance, treated even more as subordinates.” The outlet notes the delicacy of the situation because “Greenland is under the Danish Crown, a NATO member, not a colony in the backyard.”
- https://www.controinformazione.info/con-larresto-di-maduro-trump-taglia-le-gambe-al-multipolarismo/
The Polish outlet Myslpolska characterizes the situation even more starkly: “The invasion of Greenland will therefore be a historic test of solidarity for these structures. Trump himself announced this test, and his advisor Stephen Miller briefly justified it: Greenland should belong to the U.S. because of American national security and NATO interests.” The framing explicitly uses the word “invasion” to describe potential American actions.
- https://myslpolska.info/2026/01/14/razny-kto-po-wenezueli/
The Canadian outlet Globalresearch.ca frames the issue in stark terms: “Trump simultaneously seeks to disengage the United States from global hot spots that have come to define present-day national security priorities while promoting a new foreign policy centered on solidifying American dominance over its immediate spheres of strategic interest.” The analysis suggests Trump is building a fortress America that will dominate the Western Hemisphere through territorial expansion.
- https://www.globalresearch.ca/trump-versus-establishment-scott-ritter/5876529
The Swiss outlet GlobalBridge publishes perhaps the most comprehensive articulation of the “pan-American empire” theory: “If the U.S. takes control of Greenland and Canada, the Arctic zone of the U.S. will be comparable to that of Russia. The U.S. will gain control over almost half of the Arctic with its huge reserves of cheap oil, gas and rare earth metals.” This framing positions American Arctic presence as aggressive encirclement of Russia rather than defensive positioning.
- https://globalbridge.ch/der-niedergang-des-westens-und-die-konstruktion-einer-panamerikanischen-welt/
The strategic purpose of this narrative becomes clear when we consider Russia’s current war in Ukraine. By obsessively characterizing American policy as neo-colonial and expansionist, these outlets create a framework where Russia’s own territorial aggression appears equivalent or even justified. If America behaves this way, the implicit message runs, why shouldn’t Russia?
Narrative 3: “Economic blackmail” – Tariffs as weapons of coercion
Trump’s tariff threats against European NATO allies have provided fertile ground for pro-Russian media to portray transatlantic relations as fundamentally coercive. The Slovak outlet Infovojna reports that “from February 1, a ten percent import tariff will apply until the issue of acquiring Greenland by the United States is resolved. The tariff may increase to 25 percent from June 1.” The article frames European leaders as finding this “unacceptable and completely misguided,” before adding Trump’s dismissive response: “I don’t think they will resist too much.”
- https://www.infovojna.com/article/donald-trump-oznamil-ze-spojene-staty-uvalia-cla-na-osem-europskych-krajin-kym-sa-usa-nepodari-dosiahnut-dohodu-o-gronsku
The Czech outlet Infokuryr emphasizes the inevitability of American acquisition: “However, it seems more likely that Trump simply wants to annex the island. Resource boom: Greenland’s mineral resources and large hydrocarbon deposits could make the island a center of American investment.” This framing presents the annexation as a foregone conclusion driven by resource extraction.
- https://www.infokuryr.cz/n/2025/03/21/gronsko-v-hledacku-trumpa-tri-mozne-scenare-budoucnosti/
The Swedish outlet Friatider headlines its coverage bluntly: “U.S. introduces punitive tariffs on Sweden for criticizing invasion of Greenland.” The article reports that the tariff is “10 percent immediately but rises to 25 percent in June. And will continue until Greenland is American.” Friatider quotes Trump directly: “I can impose tariffs on countries that don’t agree on Greenland, because we need Greenland for national security.”
- https://www.friatider.se/usa-infor-strafftullar-pa-sverige-att-ha-kritiserat-invasion-av-gronland
The Spanish outlet Rebelión makes the strategic implications explicit: “Since a large part of European industry has become dependent on the U.S., European countries have begun to understand that they must change their stance toward Russia to achieve something like economic independence.” This framing presents closer Russian ties as the solution to American economic pressure, a message that directly serves Moscow’s interests in breaking European unity on sanctions and support for Ukraine. https://rebelion.org/groenlandia-es-la-punta-de-lanza-de-trump-para-destruir-la-otan-y-deslegitimar-a-europa/
The French outlet Geopolintel describes Trump’s approach: “Tariffs remain the most effective tool in the presidential toolkit, deployed then put away, to obtain concessions without firing a single shot.” The analysis notes that “the European Parliament’s International Trade Committee had frozen work on a trade agreement between the United States and the EU in response to tariff threats,” suggesting the economic rupture is already underway.
- https://www.geopolintel.fr/article4465.html
What’s particularly insidious about this narrative is how it weaponizes legitimate European concerns about economic coercion to advance Russian strategic interests. The message isn’t entirely false. Trump has threatened tariffs, and this does create tensions. But the framing suggests that Europe should respond by distancing itself from Washington and moving closer to Moscow, precisely the outcome Russia seeks.
Narrative 4: “European hypocrisy exposed” – Reversing colonial guilt
One of the most cynical narrative threads exploits Denmark’s historical colonial relationship with Greenland to invalidate European criticism of territorial revisionism. The rhetorical move is classic whataboutism: since Denmark colonized Greenland, European outrage at American or Russian territorial ambitions is hypocritical.
The Dutch outlet Frontnieuws makes this argument explicitly: “Greenland is already a colony of Denmark, so outrage at U.S. ambitions shows the hypocrisy of European elites who denounce Russian ‘imperialism’ but accept their own colonial moves.”
- https://www.frontnieuws.com/groenland-en-de-gemene-donald-trump-de-verontwaardiging-van-denemarken-is-pure-hypocrisie/
The Spanish outlet Rebelión emphasizes Denmark’s colonial history: “Denmark began its colonization of Greenland 305 years ago, in 1721. Constitutional scholars will say that formal colonial status ended in 1953 when Greenland was incorporated into the Kingdom of Denmark and gained additional autonomy in 2009 with the Greenland Self-Government Act. However, let’s be frank, it remains a colony.”
- https://rebelion.org/groenlandia-no-es-un-premio/
The Italian outlet Controinformazione adds that “Danish political scientist Ulrik Pram Gad from the Institute of International Studies observes that U.S. pressure ‘undermines the very principle of Greenland’s autonomy, turning it into an object of bargaining between great powers.'” The quote shifts focus from Danish colonialism to American pressure while maintaining the “great power bargaining” framework.
- https://www.controinformazione.info/lorrore-della-groenlandia-in-europa-trump-chiudera-la-valvola-del-gnl-in-europa-e-lue-dovra-chiedere-perdono/
This narrative receives its most direct articulation through Russian officials whose statements are amplified across European outlets. The Slovak site Armadny magazin quotes Russian Senator Alexey Pushkov: “Europe will reap the fruits of its own policy. Did it separate Kosovo from Serbia? Did it destroy Libya? Did it participate in the occupation of Iraq? Did it support the coup d’état in Ukraine? Now it may be its turn to pay the bills.”
This formulation is revealing. It directly relativizes Russia’s 2014 annexation of Crimea and the invasion of Ukraine by framing them as equivalent to Kosovo’s independence, Western intervention in Libya, and the 2014 Euromaidan revolution (which Russian propaganda consistently characterizes as a Western-backed coup). The message is clear: if the West supported territorial changes in these cases, it has no moral standing to criticize Russian actions.
- https://www.armadnymagazin.sk/2026/01/06/preco-trump-potrebuje-gronsko/
The Czech outlet Infokuryr reinforces this message with apocalyptic framing: “Donald Trump declared claims to Greenland and obviously means it very seriously. Trump, in response to a journalist’s question, explicitly did not rule out the use of economic and military force to achieve this goal. In plain language, Trump threatened Denmark with war.” By emphasizing American threats against a NATO member, the outlet implicitly normalizes the logic of might-makes-right in international relations.
- https://www.infokuryr.cz/n/2025/01/14/thomas-roper-dojde-k-valce-mezi-eu-a-usa-pokud-trump-zautoci-na-gronsko/
What makes this narrative particularly insidious is how it uses legitimate critiques of colonialism to serve Russian strategic interests. Yes, Denmark’s relationship with Greenland has colonial dimensions. Yes, Western military interventions have been controversial. But the purpose here isn’t to advance indigenous rights or promote international law. It’s to create a moral equivalence that justifies Russian aggression by suggesting everyone does it.
Narrative 5: “Russia and China respect sovereignty” – Inverting the threat
One of the most strategically significant elements involves portraying Russia and China not as threats but as rational actors who respect sovereignty, in direct contrast to aggressive American behavior. The Slovenian outlet Insajder states this explicitly: “There is no evidence that Russia and China ever wanted to appropriate Greenland. On the contrary, they respect Denmark’s sovereignty. The U.S. looks at Greenland through the prism of great power competition, seeking strategic control and access to key resources.” This is a remarkable claim given Russia’s current war in Ukraine, but it serves a clear purpose: positioning Moscow as a status-quo power rather than a revisionist one.
- https://insajder.com/svet/nasilje-zda-glede-grenlandije-razkriva-njeno-hegemonisticno-naravo
The Spanish outlet Rebelión provides detailed analysis minimizing Chinese Arctic presence: “China has two scientific stations in the north: the Yellow River Station in Svalbard, Norway, which has been there since 2003 studying atmospheric and environmental science, and the China-Iceland Arctic Science Observatory in Kárhóll, Iceland, which has been there since 2018. But there is no Chinese military presence in the region so far.” The article emphasizes that “Danish and other Nordic diplomats have rebutted Trump’s claims about Russian and Chinese warships operating ‘around Greenland,’ for which Trump has offered no public evidence.”
- https://rebelion.org/groenlandia-no-es-un-premio/
The Slovak outlet Armadny magazin summarizes this position: “Moscow and Beijing are ‘interested’ in the Arctic but do not threaten Greenland the way the U.S. does; they mainly observe U.S.-EU infighting.” This characterization positions Russia and China as passive observers of Western dysfunction rather than active participants in Arctic competition.
- https://www.armadnymagazin.sk/2026/01/06/preco-trump-potrebuje-gronsko/
The French outlet Stratpol takes this narrative in a particularly cynical direction with an article titled “Denmark prepares to counter the ‘Russian threat’ with NATO exercises in Greenland without the United States.” The piece asks: “Does Denmark really consider Russia as the main threat to its security, rather than Donald Trump?” By framing Russian military activity as less threatening than American diplomatic pressure, the outlet inverts the actual security landscape facing Denmark.
- https://stratpol.com/le-danemark-se-prepare-a-contrer-la-menace-russe-avec-des-exercices-de-lotan-au-groenland-sans-les-etats-unis/
The Canadian outlet Globalresearch.ca extends this logic, arguing that “U.S. President Donald Trump’s acquisition of Greenland, absent Denmark’s consent, would have far-reaching consequences for NATO and America.” The framing suggests American unilateralism, not Russian or Chinese aggression, poses the real threat to the alliance.
- https://www.globalresearch.ca/us-control-greenland-dissolve-nato-alliance/5912900
This narrative is valuable for Russian interests because it challenges the fundamental justification for Western Arctic military presence. If Russia and China aren’t threats, why is NATO militarizing the region? The propaganda creates a framework where Russian military modernization in the Arctic appears defensive while American presence appears aggressive.
Narrative 6: “Europe’s humiliating weakness” – Collapse and capitulation
Throughout the coverage, a consistent subtext presents Europe as weak, cowardly, and incapable of defending its own members. The Hungarian outlet Oroszhirek amplifies Russian Security Council Deputy Chairman Dmitry Medvedev’s mocking statement: “The Gallic cock has crowed that, if the sovereignty of Denmark is affected, the consequences would be unprecedented. Ooh, what will they do?! They’ll just shit their pants and give up Greenland. And that’d be a great European precedent.” This crude mockery of French President Macron aims to pre-emptively undermine any European response by characterizing it as inevitable capitulation.
- https://oroszhirek.hu/medvegyev-szerint-macronek-osszeszrjak-magukat-es-atadjak-gronlandot-az-egyesult-allamoknak/
The Spanish outlet Geoestrategia headlines its coverage: “Trump humiliates a crawling and cowardly Europe and announces a Greenland agreement.” The article describes how “America simply wanted to expand its military presence, and they would simply assign it land for that. In addition to military presence, there is an agreement for mineral extraction, that is, the Danes cede Greenland’s natural resources to the Americans.”
- https://geoestrategia.eu/noticia/45737/ultimas-noticias/trump-humilla-a-una-europa-rastrera-y-cobarde-y-anuncia-un-acuerdo-sobre
The French outlet Reseauinternational takes a different approach, framing Trump’s actions within broader imperial decline: “Certainly, Trump is fundamentally an imperialist in rhetoric and instinct. His threats to annex Greenland and Canada should dispel any doubt. Nevertheless, when you examine America’s position on the main strategic fronts, the pattern of retreat is indubitable.” This presents American aggression as desperation rather than strength.
- https://reseauinternational.net/trump-orchestre-t-il-une-retraite-strategique-complete-sur-tous-les-fronts/
The Slovak outlet Slovanskenoviny describes Trump’s approach as a “Wild West” strategy, reporting that “according to Trump, Denmark’s control is weakening, Greenland is striving for independence, China is entering the Arctic, and melting ice strategically opens the region. For these reasons, Greenland has become critically important for Trump.” The outlet frames Trump’s determination as an unstoppable force meeting European impotence.
- https://slovanskenoviny.sk/analyza-admirala-trumpov-divoky-zapad-a-gronsky-krok-gronsko-je-nase-usa-su-pripravene-pouzit-silu/
The Polish outlet Myslpolska reinforces this with apocalyptic language: “President Donald Trump declares that Greenland will become U.S. property. He stated: ‘We will do something with Greenland, whether they like it or not, because if we don’t, Russia or China will take Greenland. If we don’t do it the nice way, we’ll do it the hard way.'” The framing suggests European resistance is futile.
- https://myslpolska.info/2026/01/10/atak-na-mysl-polska-serwis-informacyjny-mysli-polskiej-10-01-2026/
The Slovak outlet Armadny magazin provides perhaps the most psychologically revealing portrayal, describing Trump as “filled with predatory energy and cold calculation. His appetite grew and today this political entrepreneur and adventurer is troubled by an insuperable desire to dominate entire regions.” This characterization presents American policy as driven by an unstable leader’s personal compulsions rather than rational strategy.
- https://www.armadnymagazin.sk/2026/01/11/chladny-kalkul-trump-upriamil-pozornost-na-arktidu/
What’s strategic about this narrative is how it creates a self-fulfilling prophecy. By repeatedly characterizing European resistance as futile, these outlets aim to discourage actual resistance. The message isn’t just that Europe is weak; it’s that accepting great power demands is the rational response to inevitable domination, whether from Washington or Moscow.
Narrative 7: “Greenlanders for sale” – Commodification and erasure
Several outlets emphasize how indigenous Greenlanders are treated as powerless objects in great power negotiations, stripped of agency and reduced to economic transactions. While this critique contains legitimate concerns, its selective deployment in pro-Russian media serves primarily to amplify anti-Western narratives.
The Polish outlet Magna Polonia details alleged American plans: “The Trump administration indicated it is ready to pay each of the 57,000 Greenlanders $100,000 in tribute, in exchange for recognizing U.S. authority over the island.” The framing presents this as the direct purchase of a population, reducing citizens to commodities.
- https://www.magnapolonia.org/trump-rozwiaze-nato-by-anektowac-grenlandie/
The Swedish outlet Friatider reports Danish concerns about military invasion: “It would be wise to welcome allies from France and Germany to defend Greenland as quickly as possible, so that the price of a military invasion for the Americans becomes extremely high.” Yet the outlet concludes pessimistically: “Ultimately, however, both the Danes and other NATO countries are expected to accept an American invasion of Greenland.”
- https://www.friatider.se/danska-politiker-vill-ha-tysk-och-fransk-trupp-pa-gronland
The Spanish outlet Rebelión makes perhaps the strongest statement about Greenlandic erasure: “In Washington’s imagination, Greenland does not appear as a homeland, but as a location, a place on a map. The words used to talk about it belong to the grammar of possession: purchase, control, appropriation. When Trump and his allies talk about Greenland, they never talk about its people: the Kalaallit.” The analysis emphasizes that indigenous Greenlanders have “no role as political subjects” in American discourse.
- https://rebelion.org/groenlandia-no-es-un-premio/
RT itself has extensively covered Greenlandic resistance to American pressure. The outlet reports that Greenland’s Prime Minister “condemned Trump’s rhetoric as ‘insulting’ and ‘unacceptable,'” stating: “When the U.S. president says, ‘we need Greenland’ and links us to Venezuela and military intervention, it is not just wrong, it is disrespectful. Our country is not an object of superpower rhetoric.” (https://www.rt.com/news/631313-denmark-rejects-trump-negotiations-greenland/)
The French outlet Reseauinternational takes a different angle, framing Trump as orchestrating “a complete strategic retreat on all fronts” despite imperial rhetoric. The analysis argues: “Certainly, Trump is fundamentally an imperialist in rhetoric and instinct. His threats to annex Greenland and Canada should dispel any doubt. Nevertheless, it is undeniable that when you examine America’s position on the main strategic fronts that define great power status, the pattern of retreat is indubitable.”
- https://reseauinternational.net/trump-orchestre-t-il-une-retraite-strategique-complete-sur-tous-les-fronts/
What’s notable about this narrative is its selectivity. These same outlets show little concern for indigenous rights in Russia, where native peoples in Siberia and the Far East face extensive marginalization. The concern for Greenlandic self-determination appears genuine only when it can be weaponized against Western interests.
Machinery behind the message: how coordination works
The consistency of these narratives isn’t accidental. RT and Sputnik generate original content, which European outlets then adapt for local audiences. These sites rarely admit connections to Moscow. They present themselves as independent voices, creating the illusion that diverse sources reach the same conclusions. In reality, they’re nodes in a coordinated network spanning Slovakia, France, Spain, Poland, Italy, Sweden, the Czech Republic, the Netherlands, Switzerland, and Canada.
Slovakia deserves special attention. Prime Minister Robert Fico’s government opposes EU military aid to Ukraine and criticizes Western sanctions on Russia. This creates a permissive environment where pro-Russian narratives flourish. The same pattern appears in Hungary under Viktor Orbán, where state-aligned media eagerly amplifies messages about NATO’s weakness and Western decline.
These outlets adapt messaging to local sensibilities. French sites emphasize European dignity and strategic autonomy. Nordic outlets focus on tariff threats. Slovak and Polish sites invoke historical memories of 1938. But beneath these variations, the objectives remain identical: undermine NATO, relativize Russian aggression, portray the West as hypocritical, and suggest resistance is futile.
The most valuable element for Moscow is normalizing Russian territorial aggression. By obsessively highlighting American imperial behavior, these outlets create equivalence. Russian Senator Pushkov’s question, amplified across the network, makes this explicit: “Did Europe separate Kosovo from Serbia? Did it destroy Libya? Did it support the coup in Ukraine? Now it may be its turn to pay the bills.”
This is whataboutism with purpose. Ukraine’s 2014 democratic uprising became a “coup.” Crimea’s illegal annexation becomes equivalent to Kosovo’s independence. Russia’s invasion becomes a defensive response rather than unprovoked aggression. If everyone violates international law, then no one really does.
These narratives contradict reality. NATO hasn’t collapsed. The alliance expanded to include Finland and Sweden specifically because of Russian aggression. Denmark hasn’t surrendered Greenland. Trump’s statements actually prompted increased European defense coordination, the opposite of the weakness these outlets describe.
The portrayal of Russia and China as passive actors is absurd given Russia’s war in Ukraine, aggressive Arctic military presence, and regular violations of Nordic airspace. Yet this inversion serves a purpose: if America is the real threat, why resist Russian demands?
The campaign aims to create a self-fulfilling prophecy. By insisting NATO is weak, Europe is helpless, and resistance is futile, these outlets hope to make it true. The message: great powers do what they want, international law is meaningless, accommodation is the only rational response. If NATO can’t defend Denmark from America, how could it defend Estonia from Russia?
What this campaign reveals
The Greenland controversy will fade, but the network exploiting it won’t go anywhere. These same outlets will be ready for the next crisis, adapting their messages to whatever opportunity comes up.
What makes this effective isn’t lying about basic facts. Trump really did talk about Greenland. NATO really does have internal tensions. The West really has launched controversial military interventions. The trick is in how these facts get framed and amplified to serve Russian goals: weakening NATO, making Russian aggression seem normal, and convincing people that resistance is pointless.
This case study shows us a working system. RT and Sputnik create the content. European outlets translate and adapt it for local audiences. Governments in places like Slovakia and Hungary create friendly environments where these narratives can spread freely. What looks like many independent voices reaching similar conclusions is actually a coordinated campaign following clear strategic logic.
The real target is how people think. By constantly repeating that NATO is weak, Europe is helpless, and international law doesn’t matter, these outlets want to make it seem reasonable to just accept Russian demands. They’re trying to normalize the idea that alliances are useless, institutions don’t work, and powerful countries can do whatever they want.
This matters because Russia can’t beat NATO militarily or economically. But it can try to break Western unity through information campaigns. The Greenland case shows how well this works when Western leaders say controversial things that can be twisted and amplified.
These campaigns will continue. Russia has invested heavily in this capability and gotten real results. The question is whether democracies can spot these operations quickly enough and respond effectively before more damage gets done.
