Greenland as a Turning Point – Add-On

The War Game: When BRICS Becomes a Military Alliance

by Michael Hollister
Exclusive published at Michael Hollister on January 18, 2026

1.891 words * 13 minutes readingtime

Exclusive Analysis for Subscribers

In-Depth Strategic Perspective

I. If the U.S. Takes Greenland – The War Game

In the main article, we analyzed why a U.S. attack on Greenland would break international law and tear NATO apart. Here we analyze: What comes next?

Because if the United States shows that international law is meaningless – that the world’s strongest military power can take NATO territory without fearing consequences – then that sends a signal to every other actor with geopolitical ambitions:

“The rules no longer apply. Power is everything.”

What would Russia do? What would China do? And what if they act in a coordinated manner – not individually, but as a de facto military alliance?

The following scenario is not fantasy, but military logic. It is based on publicly available strategic documents, think tank analyses, and the declared interests of the involved states.

A. Phase 1: U.S. Takes Greenland (Day 1-7)

What would a U.S. attack on Greenland look like?

Day 1: Trump declares Greenland a “strategic security risk” and activates JSOC (Joint Special Operations Command). Justification: “China and Russia have too much influence on the island.”

Day 2: 82nd Airborne Division + Marines land in Nuuk (capital, 19,000 inhabitants) and Pituffik (military base). Minimal resistance – Greenland has no army of its own, Denmark cannot react quickly enough.

Day 3: U.S. declares “temporary security zone” over Greenland. Denmark protests, convenes NATO North Atlantic Council.

Day 4-7: NATO session blocked (U.S. uses veto). Denmark stands alone. Europe is divided: France/Germany demand withdrawal, Baltics/Poland remain silent.

Result: Greenland is de facto under U.S. control. NATO is incapable of action. Europe is divided. And the rest of the world draws its conclusions.

Greenland is not a frozen backwater — it is the breaking point of the Western security order. If the United States is willing to threaten NATO territory, a taboo collapses: who defends the alliance when the aggressor comes from within? This analysis explains why Greenland marks the next escalation after Venezuela — and why NATO may not survive it. This subscriber-only analysis you can read here.

Michael Hollister is a geopolitical analyst and investigative journalist. He served six years in the German military, including peacekeeping deployments in the Balkans (SFOR, KFOR), followed by 14 years in IT security management. His analysis draws on primary sources to examine European militarization, Western intervention policy, and shifting power dynamics across Asia. A particular focus of his work lies in Southeast Asia, where he investigates strategic dependencies, spheres of influence, and security architectures. Hollister combines operational insider perspective with uncompromising systemic critique—beyond opinion journalism. His work appears on his bilingual website (German/English) www.michael-hollister.com, at Substack at https://michaelhollister.substack.com and in investigative outlets across the German-speaking world and the Anglosphere.

---