European Union leaders find themselves in a profound strategic and moral bind following a dramatic military operation ordered by former US President Donald Trump against Venezuela and his persistent threats to annex Greenland.
A Deafening Silence from Brussels
In the early hours of Sunday, US bombers, fighter jets, and helicopters launched an attack on Caracas, while special forces seized Venezuela's president, Nicolás Maduro. Within 24 hours, the European Commission broke its silence on social media. Strikingly, the EU's executive body made no mention of the operation, which had been denounced by numerous global leaders, opposition figures within Europe, and international legal experts as a flagrant breach of international law.
Instead, the Commission's post focused on wishing Europeans a safe return from holiday, highlighting the benefits of free movement and consumer protections. The glaring omission underscored a painful reality: while the EU excels at regulating cross-border travel and consumer rights, condemning a powerful, longstanding ally for actions that undermine liberal democracy and the rules-based international order presents a far greater challenge.
The Core of Europe's Dilemma
This paralysis stems from a severe conflict of principles. Alberto Alemanno, a professor of EU law, articulated the crux of the problem. "If Europe acquiesces in US actions against the Maduro regime, it risks weakening the legal principles that underpin its opposition to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine," he stated.
"If, however, it condemns those actions," Alemanno continued, "Europe risks alienating its primary security guarantor and straining transatlantic unity – at a moment when collective defence against Russia is especially critical." European leaders, who recently met with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and US envoy Steve Witkoff in Paris to discuss postwar security guarantees, are desperate not to derail any potential peace progress.
A Muted and Divided Response
The weakness of Europe's position was laid bare in the reactions from national capitals. French President Emmanuel Macron stated he would shed no tears for Maduro, while German Chancellor Friedrich Merz emphasised Maduro's illegitimacy but called the legal assessment of the US raid "complex." Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni went further, labelling the attack "legitimate" self-defence. European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen offered only that the bloc was "following the situation closely."
Only Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez struck a more principled chord, bluntly stating that while Spain did not recognise the Maduro regime, "neither will it recognise an intervention that violates international law." The overall tepid response was perhaps best highlighted by Trump himself, who gleefully reposted Macron's remarks on his Truth Social network.
A Stronger Stance on Greenland
In contrast to the muddled response on Venezuela, European leaders have shown significantly more resolve regarding Trump's repeated assertions that the US "absolutely" needs to take control of Greenland, a self-governing territory of Denmark. Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen was unequivocal: "I have to say this very directly to the United States. The US has no right to annex any … of the Kingdom of Denmark."
Greenland's own Prime Minister, Jens-Frederik Nielsen, accused the US of "completely and utterly unacceptable" rhetoric. On Tuesday, the leaders of France, Germany, Italy, Poland, Spain, and the UK jointly backed Denmark, declaring, "Greenland belongs to its people. It is for Denmark and Greenland, and them only, to decide on matters concerning Denmark and Greenland."
Experts Condemn European Timidity
Many analysts have criticised the EU's cautious approach. Dr John Cotter, a researcher in EU constitutional law at Keele University, argued that leaders failing to condemn the US attack "out of fear of provoking Trump’s ire" were misguided. "First, Trump clearly doesn’t care what they think. Second, he couldn’t hold them in more contempt anyway," Cotter said. "European leaders might as well have shown some dignity."
Nathalie Tocci of Rome’s Istituto Affari Internazionali warned, "The more European countries act as colonies, unable and unwilling to stand up to Trump, the more they’ll be treated as such."
Despite the firmer rhetoric on Greenland, experts warn the underlying vulnerability remains. Mujtaba Rahman of the Eurasia Group consultancy cautioned that a potential US intervention in Greenland represents "the biggest source of risk to the transatlantic alliance, and to intra-Nato and intra-EU cohesion – arguably far greater than [the risk] presented by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine." The episode has starkly revealed the EU's struggle to uphold its founding values when confronted by the actions of a capricious and indispensable ally.
