特朗普就格陵兰问题向丹麦施压，使欧洲联盟面临严峻的统一性考验。该争议叠加关税威胁和建立联合国之外安全框架的设想，发生在欧盟本已因乌克兰战争而分裂、经济承压之际。北约自1949年以来支撑欧洲安全约80年，如今其可靠性首次被广泛质疑。市场反应出现波动，全球股市一度下跌后反弹，丹麦一只教师与学者养老基金开始抛售美国国债，部分企业暂缓在欧洲债市融资，显示金融层面对政治风险的敏感度上升。

政治层面的分歧更加量化可见。欧盟27个成员国中，仅6个国家因支持丹麦而成为特朗普关税威胁的直接目标，凸显“分而治之”的压力测试。特朗普在达沃斯表示不动用武力，但坚持“收购”格陵兰，并称已形成“未来协议框架”，同时取消新关税威胁。尽管如此，欧洲议会已冻结一项美欧贸易协定的批准程序，表明制度性反制正在累积。

结构性风险在于长期信任的侵蚀。欧洲官员普遍认为二战后秩序正在瓦解，美国安全承诺的可信度被削弱。即便短期内冲突缓和，政策反复和个人化施压已造成不可逆损害。随着欧盟在安抚与对抗之间摇摆，内部协调成本上升，未来危机概率被重新定价，欧洲正加速进入一个对华盛顿更具对抗性、但自身更碎片化的战略环境。

Donald Trump’s pressure on Denmark over Greenland has become a stress test of European Union unity. The dispute, combined with tariff threats and proposals for a rival security framework outside the United Nations, comes as Europe is already split by the war in Ukraine and under economic strain. NATO has underpinned European security for about 80 years since 1949, yet its reliability is now openly questioned. Financial markets reacted with volatility: global stocks briefly sold off before rebounding, a Danish teachers’ and academics’ pension fund began dumping US Treasuries, and some companies paused borrowing plans in Europe’s debt markets, signaling heightened sensitivity to political risk.

Political fragmentation is increasingly measurable. Of the EU’s 27 members, only six were directly targeted with tariff threats for backing Denmark, highlighting a divide-and-pressure dynamic. Trump said in Davos he would not use force but insisted on an “acquisition” of Greenland, claiming a “framework of a future deal” while calling off new tariffs. Despite this, the European Parliament froze a ratification vote on a US-EU trade agreement, indicating that institutional retaliation is building.

The deeper risk is structural erosion of trust. European officials increasingly argue the post–World War II order is breaking down and US security guarantees are less credible. Even if tensions ease, repeated policy reversals and personalized pressure have caused damage that may not be reversible. As the EU oscillates between appeasement and resistance, coordination costs rise and the probability of future crises is repriced, pushing Europe toward a more adversarial relationship with Washington while remaining internally fragmented.