As Trump is warned Greenland raid will finish Nato, who could the US President target next?

Donald Trump was last night warned that any attempt to seize Greenland would spell the end of Nato.

The US President has hinted that the minerals-rich island could be next on his hit list following a dramatic raid on Venezuela at the weekend.

In a rare break with Washington, Keir Starmer yesterday warned President Trump to stay out of Nato states.

Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen said the US threats against Greenland, which is a semi-autonomous territory of Denmark, had to be taken ‘seriously’.

She added that any attempt to seize it would collapse the Nato alliance which has been the bedrock of Western security since the Second World War.

In a bleak assessment, she added: ‘I believe one should take the American President seriously when he says that he wants Greenland. But I will also make it clear that if the US chooses to attack another Nato country militarily, then everything stops, including Nato and thus the security that has been established since the end of the Second World War.’

On a dramatic day of world events:

• A British defence source told the Daily Mail there was a ’30 per cent chance’ Mr Trump would attempt to seize Greenland;

• The Prime Minister faced a Labour backlash after he refused to criticise the raid on Maduro’s home by US special forces;

• Foreign Secretary Yvette Cooper signalled further tension with the US, saying the UK did not recognise the interim Venezuelan regime led by Maduro’s deputy;

• South American leaders warned Mr Trump against further military expansionism, with Colombian President Gustavo Petro saying he was personally willing to ‘take up arms’ to repel an invasion;

• US envoy Mike Waltz savaged the UN for criticising the removal of a dictator whose reign it described as illegitimate;

• A snap YouGov poll found that the British public disapprove of President Trump’s intervention in Venezuela by a margin of 51:21;

• The PM prepared for talks in Paris on forming a ‘coalition of the willing’ to hold the peace in Ukraine, which are now likely to be dominated by concerns about Mr Trump’s realpolitik approach. Sir Keir has spent years lecturing opponents on the importance of international law but has been desperate not to antagonise Mr Trump by criticising his raid on Venezuela.

Former defence secretary Sir Ben Wallace warned the tactic could backfire.

‘Whatever the UK government thinks, it needs to be clear about it,’ he said. ‘They can support Trump’s actions or they can condemn it. But clucking around like headless chickens damages the UK deeply – there’s no leadership, no principles and no ideas.’

Sir Keir said on Saturday that he wanted to speak with Mr Trump urgently about the raid on Venezuela.

But government sources acknowledged they had not yet managed to place a call with the US President – and may not now do so until the end of the week.

Sir Keir later broke his silence on Greenland amid mounting fears that Mr Trump may be serious about targeting a territory prized for its strategic location and reserves of valuable minerals.

President Trump suggested at the weekend that Venezuela may not be the last country subject to US intervention. ‘We do need Greenland, absolutely,’ Mr Trump told The Atlantic magazine.

One British defence source yesterday said there was a ’30 per cent chance’ that President Trump would try to annex Greenland, despite its status as a member of Nato.

Asked about Ms Frederiksen’s insistence that the US had ‘no right’ to seize Greenland, Sir Keir said: ‘Well, I stand with her, and she’s right about the future of Greenland.’

Asked again if he agreed with Denmark’s request for the US to drop its claims to Greenland, he replied: ‘Yes. Greenland and the Kingdom of Denmark are to decide the future of Greenland, and only Greenland and the Kingdom of Denmark.

‘Denmark is a close ally in Europe, it is a Nato ally, and it’s very important the future of Greenland is, as I say, for the Kingdom of Denmark, and for Greenland, and only for Greenland and the Kingdom of Denmark.’

The Trump administration has repeatedly spoken of its desire to take control of Greenland, arguing it is essential for American security in the North Atlantic.

Katie Miller, the wife of one of Mr Trump’s senior aides, Stephen Miller, posted a picture on social media at the weekend of Greenland in the colours of the American flag alongside the word ‘soon’.

Greenland has strongly pushed back against suggestions it could become the 51st state of the US.

The island’s Prime Minister Jens-Frederik Nielsen hit back at the latest rhetoric from the US, saying: ‘Threats, pressure, and talk of annexation have no place between friends.

‘That is not how one speaks to a people who have repeatedly demonstrated responsibility, stability, and loyalty. Enough is enough.’

Following his rendition of Maduro, President Trump has made brash threats to intervene militarily against several nations across the world. 

The capture of Maduro was almost immediately followed by warnings against the leaders of Colombia, Cuba, Mexico, Greenland and Iran, to name just a few, that they may face regime changes or military intervention in the coming months. 

But how realistic is the US President’s current rhetoric? Is Venezuela just the beginning? 

Venezuela

The US has already captured Maduro and his wife in a dramatic Special Forces raid. 

President Trump said he took action to prevent drug trafficking, to utilise the country’s vast natural resources and rare earth minerals to punish the country for sending migrants to the US.

Trump has threatened further military action should the Maduro dictatorship, which remains in government, not pursue policies favourable to the US. 

The action sent a powerful message to China and Russia, which are seeking to acquire greater influence in Central America.

Trump said there is ‘tremendous energy’ in Venezuela which needed to be protected ‘for ourselves and for the world’. 

Venezuela has the world’s largest proven petroleum reserves, about 18 per cent of the global total. 

It also has significant quantities of gold and rare earth minerals required for leading-edge technological manufacturing that are of particular interest to China.

Trump is an advocate of the 1823 Monroe Doctrine which declares the entirety of the Americas, the Northern and Southern hemispheres and Central America to be its exclusive zone of influence. 

In recent days this has been dubbed the ‘Donroe Doctrine’.

It is difficult to see how Trump can keep his promise to ‘run’ Venezuela without taking further action. 

Trump has claimed he is ‘not afraid of boots on the ground’, but that would be more controversial in the US, particularly with MAGA supporters who voted Trump because he said he would end the US’s involvement in foreign conflicts.

Venezuela remains the US’s strategic priority in the region due to its wealth.

Likelihood of further US action: 4/5

Iran 

As recently as Sunday night, Trump threatened to hit Iran ‘very hard’ if dictatorial authorities continued their harsh crackdown on protests that have entered a second week.

At least 20 people, including at least one member of Iran’s security forces, have been killed following protests that have spread across the country from the capital, Tehran. 

The protests began first with merchants in Tehran before spreading. While initially focused on economic issues, the demonstrations soon saw protesters chanting anti-government statements as well. 

Anger has been simmering over the years, particularly after the 2022 death of 22-year-old Mahsa Amini in police custody which triggered nationwide demonstrations. 

As of Monday morning, demonstrations are said to have taken place in over 220 towns and cities in 26 of Iran’s 31 provinces – resulting in nearly 1,000 people being arrested. 

Trump said he would take action if any more protesters died. 

Speaking aboard Air Force One, he said without elaborating: ‘We’re watching it very closely. If they start killing people like they have in the past, I think they’re going to get hit very hard by the United States.’

The US could order further air strikes against Iran, following its attacks on the country’s nuclear installations last year.

Last June, he ordered American forces to strike military, nuclear and civilian targets across Iran, alongside Israel’s forces, in a lightning 12-day offensive. 

The build-up of US transport aircraft in the UK in recent weeks has also been linked to the US’s plans for further interventions in the Middle East.

Were Trump to send troops or missiles to Iran, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei would be in a significantly disadvantaged position.

Its regional allies, which Iran used to call the ‘Axis of Resistance’ has suffered greatly in recent years. 

A lightning offensive in December 2024 overthrew Iran’s longtime stalwart ally and client in Syria, President Bashar Assad, after years of war there. 

Yemen’s Iranian-backed Houthi rebels also have been pounded by Israeli and American airstrikes. 

Meanwhile, Israel has crushed Hamas, which is backed by Iran, in the devastating war in the Gaza Strip. Hezbollah, the Shiite militant group in Lebanon, has seen its top leadership killed by Israel and has been struggling since. 

Iran’s superpower allies have done little to help. 

China meanwhile, has remained a major buyer of Iranian crude oil, but hasn’t provided overt military support. Neither has Russia, which has relied on Iranian drones in its war on Ukraine.

Likelihood of US action: 4/5 

Canada

Last February, Donald Trump claimed that Canada would be better off accepting an offer to become the 51st state. 

Trump claimed he was serious about the idea to bring the US’ neighbours to the north into the fold, telling Fox News: ‘I think Canada would be much better off being a 51st state because we lose $200 billion a year with Canada, and I’m not going to let that happen.’

Days prior, Trump’s National Security Advisor (NSA) Mike Waltz said it was unlikely that the US military would invade Canada and annex the country.

In November 2024, following his victory over Joe Biden, then-president-elect Trump met with Canada’s then-leader Justin Trudeau following an announcement on social media that he was planning on imposing a 25 per cent tariff on Canadian goods. 

This, he claimed, was in response to Canada’s apparent refusal to address drug and human trafficking concerns at the border it shares with the U.S.

This is where he first proposed Canada becoming a state if it couldn’t handle the economic sanctions.

Since February, Trump has made little comment about whether he intends to pursue the annexation of Canada as part of his foreign policy goals. 

Likelihood of US action 0/5 

Mexico 

Trump said in November that he would be ‘OK’ with the American military striking drug lords operating inside Mexico, arguing that it would be justified to stop the inflow of the deadly opioid fentanyl to the United States.  

‘Would I launch strikes in Mexico to stop drugs? It’s OK with me. Whatever we have to do to stop drugs,’ Trump said.

‘I didn’t say I’m doing it, but I’d be proud to do it. Because we’re going to save millions of lives by doing it.’

But Mexico’s president Claudia Sheinbaum quickly rebuffed the idea that the US would be allowed to strike targets in her country, calling it a ‘non-starter’.

‘It’s not going to happen’, she bluntly said at a press conference.   

Earlier in 2025, Trump furiously slammed Mexico, along with China and Canada, for allegedly not doing enough to stop the influx of drugs and migrants into the US. 

He put up a 25 per cent additional tariff on imports from Canada and Mexico and a 10 per cent additional tariff on imports from China.

The White House said at the time: ‘The orders make clear that the flow of contraband drugs like fentanyl to the United States, through illicit distribution networks, has created a national emergency, including a public health crisis’.

It added: ‘Mexican drug trafficking organisations have an intolerable alliance with the government of Mexico. 

‘The government of Mexico has afforded safe havens for the cartels to engage in the manufacturing and transportation of dangerous narcotics, which collectively have led to the overdose deaths of hundreds of thousands of American victims. 

‘This alliance endangers the national security of the United States, and we must eradicate the influence of these dangerous cartels.’ 

Likelihood of US action 2/5 

Cuba

Following the enormous military action in Venezuela, Trump said that Cuba may be the next country to face an American-led regime change. 

He said: ‘I think Cuba is going to be something we’ll end up talking about, because Cuba is a failing nation right now, very badly failing nation, and we want to help the people. 

The Republican continued: ‘That system has not been a very good one for Cuba. The people there have suffered for many, many years.

Trump’s Secretary of State, Marco Rubio, doubled down on Trump’s warning: ‘Suffice it to say, you know, Cuba is a disaster. It’s run by incompetent, senile men.’

‘If I lived in Havana and I was in the government, I’d be concerned, at least a little bit,’ the US’ top diplomat added.

The country has faced major sanctions and restrictions on foreign aid under both Republican and Democrat administrations. 

Last February, the Trump administration halted foreign aid funding for Cuban media outlets and increased visa restrictions related to programmes related to sending healthcare and other workers across the world, amid allegations of forced labour.  

But the US has little to gain strategically from invading Cuba and any foreign intervention would only further destabilise the country. Its links to Russia and China also complicate the situation.

While there would also be huge opposition within the country, the exiled Cuban population in the US would back Trump to the jilt.

The Cuban government felt sufficient concern after the Venezuela operation to announce ‘all nations of the region must remain alert, as the threat hands over us all’.

While US Secretary of State Marco Rubio warned: ‘Look, if I lived in Havana and I worked in the government, I’d be concerned.’

The administration is considered more vulnerable to internal threats rather than external threats considering its economic dependence on Venezuela.

The US could cease financial support packages, leading to the Cuban regime, historically opposed to the US for many decades, falling under its own weight.

Likelihood of US action: 1/5  

Greenland 

Trump said has long held an obsession with Greenland, a large but sparsely populated island that is part of the Kingdom of Denmark, a Nato ally. 

In recent weeks, he appointed Louisiana governor Jeff Landry to the role of special envoy to the island, signalling his intent to push for ownership of the territory. 

He claimed that the US’s acquisition of Greenland was vital to ‘national protection’, citing its vast resources of minerals used by American tech firms. 

The Republican said in an interview with The Atlantic this week: ‘We do need Greenland, absolutely’.

He described the island as being ‘surrounded by Russian and Chinese ships.’ 

But Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen rebuffed Trump’s advances: ‘It makes absolutely no sense to talk about the US needing to take over Greenland. 

‘The US has no right to annex any of the three countries in the Danish kingdom.

‘The Kingdom of Denmark – and thus Greenland – is a member of Nato and is therefore covered by the Alliance’s collective security guarantee. 

‘We already have a defence agreement between the Kingdom of Denmark and the United States that grants the US broad access to Greenland. In addition, the Kingdom has made significant investments in security in the Arctic.

‘I therefore strongly urge the US to cease its threats against a historically close ally, and against another country and another people who have stated very clearly that they are not for sale’.

British Prime Minister Keir Starmer said he stood by his Danish counterpart’s condemnation of Trump. 

He said: ‘I stand with her, and she’s right about the future of Greenland.’

He added: ‘Greenland and the Kingdom of Denmark are to decide the future of Greenland, and only Greenland and the Kingdom of Denmark.

‘Denmark is a close ally in Europe, it is a Nato ally, and it’s very important the future of Greenland is, as I say, for the Kingdom of Denmark, and for Greenland, and only for Greenland and the Kingdom of Denmark.’ 

Greenland’s population of 57,000 people is self-governing, although defence and foreign policy are determined by Denmark. Polling has indicated they oppose US expansion plans.

Greenland is the world’s largest island which is not a continent and is located in the Arctic. Fourth-fifths of the territory is covered by ice.

Danish territories belong to NATO by extension and therefore any attack on Greenland by Russia or other actors would trigger the alliance’s Article Five agreement on collective defence. The island is already defended by Danish and US troops.

Likelihood of US action: 1/5  

Colombia 

Over the weekend, Trump warned that Colombia could be the next country to face a military operation. 

President Trump said while travelling on Air Force One Sunday that Colombia’s leftist President Gustavo Petro was a ‘sick man’ who ‘likes making cocaine’ after threatening Petro to ‘watch his a**’.

Trump’s attacks on the Colombian leader came after Petro described Washington’s attack on Venezuela as an ‘assault on the sovereignty’ of Latin America.

‘Colombia is very sick, too, run by a sick man, who likes making cocaine and selling it to the United States, and he’s not going to be doing it very long,’ he said. 

When asked whether the US would pursue a military operation against the country, Trump bluntly replied, ‘It sounds good to me.’ 

Petro hit back at Trump in a fiery social media post, after the US president accused him of being a drug trafficker.  

‘Stop slandering me, Mr Trump,’ Petro said in a lengthy post on X.

‘That’s not how you threaten a Latin American president who emerged from the armed struggle and then from the people of Colombia’s fight for Peace.’

In a later social media post Sunday, Petro added: ‘Friends do not bomb.’   

In a bid to appease the White House, Petro has offered to act as an intermediary between the US and Venezuela.

Likelihood of US action: 2/5

Panama Canal  

Last March, Trump ordered the American military to draw up plans to seize the Panama Canal in a bid to ‘reclaim’ the economically important waterway.  

The US Southern Command developed an array of potential plans to ensure America has full access to the Panama Canal, two military sources told Reuters. 

Draft strategies reportedly ranged from partnering closely with Panamanian security forces to using American troops to forcibly seize the waterway, which officials say is the less likely option.

Officials said Admiral Alvin Holsey, commander of US Southern Command, presented the proposals to Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth. 

Trump asserted that the US needs to take back the canal because China controls it and could use the waterway to undermine American interests.

In his inaugural speech last January, Trump repeated accusations that Panama has broken the promises it made for the final transfer of the canal in 1999.

The Panama Canal, located at the narrowest part of the isthmus between North and South America, is considered one of the world’s most strategically important waterways.

Trump has said repeatedly he wants to ‘take back’ the waterway, but has not offered specifics about how he would do so, or if military action might be required.

One US said a document, described as an interim national security guidance by the new administration, called on the military to look at military options to safeguard access to the canal.

A second official said the US military had a wide array of potential options to safeguard access, including ensuring a close partnership with Panama’s military.  

Panama’s president said he could not ‘accept military bases or defence sites’ in the country. The US does not have any dispute with Panama. But it is wary of Chinese influence in the country.

Likelihood of US action: 1/5

Nigeria, Brazil, Yemen and South Africa

Trump has also set his sights on a number of other countries.  

On Christmas Day, Trump ordered the American military to launch a series of strikes targeting ISIS militants across northwest Nigeria. 

The operation was conducted with the permission of the Nigerian government, which has sought to rid the country of extremists for decades.  

The Republican president said following the strikes: ‘I have previously warned these Terrorists that if they did not stop the slaughtering of Christians, there would be hell to pay, and tonight, there was.

‘The Department of War executed numerous perfect strikes, as only the United States is capable of doing.’

But Nigerian officials rejected that the strikes were carried out to protect Christians exclusively.  

Neither Trump nor other Nigerian officials have elaborated on the possibility of accepting US troops on the ground or of other strikes in the near future. 

In South Africa, Trump’s fixation on the plight of White Afrikaners led his to threaten to cut all future funding to the nation in an effort to punish the government for allowing what he called ‘human rights violations’.

He wrote on Truth Social last February: ‘South Africa is confiscating land, and treating certain classes of people VERY BADLY.

‘It is a bad situation that the Radical Left Media doesn’t want to so much as mention.

‘A massive Human Rights VIOLATION, at a minimum, is happening for all to see. The United States won’t stand for it, we will act.

‘Also, I will be cutting off all future funding to South Africa until a full investigation of this situation has been completed!’

Up in Yemen, in the Middle East, he threatened to rain hell upon Houthi rebels if they did not stop bombing Red Sea shipments in March. 

He ordered ‘decisive and powerful’ military action over the capital of Sanaa, adding that ‘overwhelming lethal force’ would be used until Iranian-backed Houthi rebels cease their attacks on shipping along a vital maritime corridor.

And in Brazil in July, the Trump administration placed an eye-watering additional 40 per cent tariff on Brazil, bringing the total tariff amount to 50 per cent.

The White House said at the time: ‘Members of the Government of Brazil have taken actions that interfere with the economy of the United States, infringe the free expression rights of United States persons, violate human rights, and undermine the interest the United States has in protecting its citizens and companies. 

‘Members of the Government of Brazil are also politically persecuting a former President of Brazil, which is contributing to the deliberate breakdown in the rule of law in Brazil, to politically motivated intimidation in that country, and to human rights abuses.’