Security Verification
www.ft.com

Archived link (removepaywall.com)

…

The Danish Defence Intelligence Service said on Thursday that there was a “low but growing risk” that Russia could move a small number of troops, possibly without insignia, into a neighbouring country or use long-range weapons on infrastructure used to support Ukraine.

“It could involve the deployment of military forces into a limited area inside Nato countries bordering Russia — for instance, under the pretext of protecting local Russian minorities,” Thomas Ahrenkiel, the head of the DDIS, told a news conference. “The aim would be to divide the alliance.”

The Danish statement is the most explicit warning yet about Russia’s plans following a number of “hybrid” attacks, including a foiled drone strike on Leipzig airport in Germany and a Russian ship firing flares at a Danish helicopter over the Baltic Sea.

…

Danish intelligence said that Russia was under more pressure than at any other time since it launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022. The intelligence service added that there was “no prospect” of Russia making a major breakthrough in the next six months.

…

Russia would intensify its hybrid attacks against European countries with “greater consequences” for those targeted, the Danes warned, including “destructive cyber attacks that cripple societal functions as well as sabotage attacks that carry a high risk of casualties”.

…

Danish intelligence said on Thursday that it still believed it would take Russia six months to wage a local war against a neighbouring country that belongs to Nato, two years to pose a credible threat of a regional war and five years to launch a large-scale war in Europe.

But it added that it now thought that Russia could escalate against the west through increased hybrid attacks or a limited military attack in the coming months “even if the war in Ukraine continues”.

  • motionofethre@piefed.socialEnglish
    8·
    7 days ago

    https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/2026/09/agreement-between-the-government-of-the-united-states-of-america-and-the-government-of-the-kingdom-of-denmark-together-with-the-government-of-greenland-to-amend-and-supplement-the-agreement-of-27-apri/

    No state that is not a member of NATO shall be allowed to establish its own manned or unmanned military installations in Greenland nor shall they be allowed a persistent presence of military forces in Greenland, unless otherwise agreed by the Parties.

    Given the threat to national security and public order posed by increased efforts by adversaries to expand influence and control in Greenland, the Parties agree that states or investors from a state that is not a member of NATO, a NATO partner, or an EU member state shall not be allowed to have (i) control, (ii) significant influence, or (iii) access to non-public information that may constitute a threat to national security or public order within Particularly Sensitive Sectors or Activities in the territory of Greenland (including the Territorial Waters), unless agreed between the Parties that the activities of such states or investors would not constitute a threat to national security or public order.

    It’s not as plainly laid out, but what you said is probably how it would happen.

    • givesomefucks@lemmy.worldEnglish
      1·
      7 days ago

      I mean, yeah…

      Most of what I said was just summarizing it except:

      The US would lose almost all of its foreign bases by the time the last domino from that fell. What NATO country would tolerate a base of a country in a war against NATO?

      But that’s not exactly a leap in logic

      If he leaves NATO he has to leave Greenland.

      If he doesn’t, then US precense in Greenland becomes a foreign occupation which is an act of war. And act of war against a NATO country is an act of war against NATO.

      Like, the official Nato position “an attack against one is an attack against all”.

      I think even Marco Rubio would catch that, which again, is the reason trump “got” what he wanted. They got played, gained nothing and painted themselves into a corner where they can’t just stay out of a NATO v Russia war, which has always been one of Putin’s and by extension Trump’s main goals…

      I know I overestimate people, but it’s pretty fucking plain it’s not like I sat around and studied it, I just skimmed the article from earlier.

      • motionofethre@piefed.socialEnglish
        1·
        7 days ago

        Yeah. I was just hoping it was more plainly stated. I think what little subtly remains will be lost on many Americans

      • BlackAura@lemmy.worldEnglish
        3·
        7 days ago

        What I find fascinating about this (if he doesn’t leave Greenland) is how Canada, as far as I know, would never leave NATO.

        Meaning now we have almost 9000 kilometers of border that immediately turns into… What? Effectively the equivalent of the North Korea and South Korea border? I don’t think Canada has the available troops to immediately defend that but I guess we would get help from our NATO allies.

        Also NORAD is effectively over.