I have spent a lot of time following the international scene as it plays out around Mr. Trump expressing his “need” of Greenland.

I believe that anybody in this world is allowed to sense and express hi or hers own needs. But as well as that is important, it is as well important to accept and respect, that your need, can in a relationship not always be fullfilled:

In this Greenlandic matter, seen from my perspective, the scene is beginning to be a little bit like talking to a child, who is wining about needing a toy in a store : “I need Greenland”.

We started by saying: “I am sorry, but you cannot have Greenland.”

“But then I want to buy it”, the child replays . “I am sorry, but that is not possible”…

Yesterday we sent out both fathers an mother of both Greenland and Denmark out to tell the clear message: “You can’t have Greenland.”

The childs response to the father (state chief) of Greenland: ” I don’t know who he is. I don’t know anything about him. But I can say that he is going to regret that” (I might throw my tractor in his face?). And following: “We were having a meeting yesterday about me having Greenland”.

Before we have seen actions like: “What if I send a friend with red caps?” an “What if I send a friend with cajun food?”

It seems to be very difficult to accept not possesing Greenland into his ownership. I sense the impulse to frame: Please can some adult step up and tell the boy to give up on his plans on having Greenland. He somehow believe that having Greenland is very important for his sense of security and success. But: He cannot have Greenland and is disstressing to greenlanders that he doesn’t seem to respect boundaries set. Please make him accept that, so we can continue an adult conversation about important matters.

In both Greenland and Denmark we want collaboration, we want equally respectful dialogue.

What kind of a disrespect is honestly the president showing on behalf of the american people?  Doesn’t USA respect boundaries anymore? Greenland is a state in the suveraign Kingdom of Denmark. Could Greenlanders decide to drop that historic attachment. Sure. But why on earth  do the president suggest that? It purely comes from himself dreaming of exactly that territorie. It is not some kind of real estate, it is a state with citizens. And they did not feel tratned before Trump started spreaing fear and mistrust to attain his goal.

He has for a long time now been bragging about that he want to “own” Greenland, posting pictures and grafics followed by a belittling tone that seemed neatby grooming etc. – And he doesn’t even know who is the government chairman of Greenland when he sees him. I mean what level of diplomacy is that? Come on, how far are you willing to go in your showing of disrespect?

What the head af Greenland is stating is that Greenland stays under the kingdom of Denmark. What this man is saying, is that Greenland do not want to be a part of USA. How difficult can that be to understand.

Please just respect that. This chairman is your current neighbour – and allie. Did he ever by any means harm you? If not, please show some respect.

You cannot just point out some island, that you want to own, even though you are the president of a big part of the world. Any power position is fragile if you loose humbleness, respect and sense of feets in the ground. You need to respect the order of the world to be a respectable leader of the free democratic world.

This chief of Greenland has his feet in the Greenlandic ground, and he has sent you a clear message. If you overrule countries soveraignty it can have severe consequences for both you and for what we think about the people of United States. We cannot leave a world with no respect for boarders to our grandchildren. We do not want a world led by huge forces imperialistic powerforces that battles towards aech other in an ongoing power struggle.

As well as respect of boarders and boundaries, we in both Greenland and Denmark want dialogue, cooperation and values diplomacy. We have swallowed a huge amount of provocations from the US president in good faith and trust. But time has run out for that, if you ask me.

Noone in Denmark nor Greenland wants to escalate conflicts. But there must also be a point, at which we put our foot down and say “No thank you” to further disrespect.

Have everybody in Denmark always been respectful towards Greenlandic people? No. But as our minister of foreign affairs just clearly put it, this is 2026 and today we trade with pople, we don’t trade people. There are wounds healing. But that only make it even more important to underline the importance of respecting boundaries.

Greenlanders asked yesterday in New York Times: What’s next? What’s happening now? Of course craving peace and stability. My answer would be: Stay in the dialogue. Speak your voice and truth. Be brave and bold. But don’t be naive and don’t expect love, understanding and care from people, who doesn’t hold that for you. And think through that anything you say may be held against you, because you are in an emotionally insecure environment when you meet such a guy.

Systematic approach to relationships can help create a more effective process for working with others. If one can paticipate in a dialogue room at least with the intention to dialogue respectfully.

When we create connection between people, it can create commitment to a shared vision, engagement, and breakthrough results. Whereas a disconnecting communication filled with critiques, shaming, blaming, belittleing, disrespect or direct treats is turning connection into war-zones, defensive behaviours and a non-constructive environment.

So to the greenlanders I want to say:

If you have an experience where you think you were being an open and supportive person, and found that people didn’t seem to be supporting you, the ground basis of safety and trust might not have been met.

When people, who should collaborate meet an envinronment which is not ensuring safety it is perfectly normal to have fear or anxiety feelings. We, as human beeings, have automatic fear responses, that can be triggered whenever we perceive threats.

Our neurosystem picks up on other peoples emotions. That means that when we meet a tensed or frightened person, our body will respond with an underneath sensation of tension and fear. Even before you know if there is anything realistic to be afraid of.

The pressure you are in is huge.

When we can set a clear common intention and build trust it is possible to collaborate. We need to accept the validity of the other persons perspective. Which is not the same as having the same thoughts and feelings. And which is not the same as sharing the same concerns or even goals.

To clarify which common goals we can have, we need to establish a safe environment first, in which we can make our higher brain cells work instead of constantly reacting on perceived threats. Our brain has to experience that we are safe. Safety comes first.

A safe enviroment is build up in its basis by framing the time, rules, regulations and limits of the conversation. The next might be setting an intention. But an intention is not enough if you are going into a high- conflict area. High-conflict conversations need leadership that are willing to set a frame in which a constructive dialogue can take place. If you for example is going to lead a dialogue in a warzone the first commitment might be: Whatever happends we don’t shoot each other. Another boundary might be: You can’t pay me to take your part, I will speak my own voice.

If the one person in a conversations unspoken or spoken intention is wanting to achieve dominance or controle over the other person or the other persons space, it is not excacty an emotionally safe space for deeper emotionally sharing. That doesn’t mean that we can’t talk, it just set some limit on the depth of what can be adressed. Since you need to take care of your emotionally safety yourself. Which can be a stressfull environment to be in, since human beeings crave for emotionally safe connections and we are build to sense fear if we meet threat.

If you go into a conversation about: How can we collarborate about common security it is a very noble place to be. But if you are with people who basically doesn’t respect you, you cannot really trust even that they are willing to refer honest even the subject you were talking about. That is simply a part of the game.

What can you do about that? Nothing. The best thing you can do is to know it and accept it, and keep breathing and speaking your truth. Sometimes others will walk out the room and mayby misinterpret what you were saying, or even distort your words intentionally. You cannot controle that. You can do your best to make yourself heard and understood, but you cannot really controle how others perceive your prescence.

One thing you can do though is to ensure and collect proof. That might be written proof, agreed reports, sound recordings or video. To be used as a documentation of truth about what went on.

An approach to enhange trust is to ask for the truth to be told. Truth is a foundation for trust, and trust can be build on sharing truth. Instead of spreading false manipulative narratives to gain control or dominance. You can gain trustworthiness and reliability by sharing your thruth and true facts. And ask for the same from the others.

When someone looks down on you, that doesn’t mean you have to look down on yourself. You can stand tall with your own truth and your valid values. Any person on this planet is equally allowed to stand up and speak his or her truth.

If you cannot talk at a level of achieving understanding and emotionally support, you can for example point out which consequnses you see in front of you in different scenarios. Including boundaries, limits and possibilities.

Consequences is a language that most people understand even when they are less emotionally available.

A consequence is for example: “If you keep treatening me, I will not continue the communication” Or “If you take anything of mine, I will sue you.”

I am not saying that you should not aim for dialogue or that dialogue is not way forward, I am just examplifieng how boundaries can be set that can set a frame for a healthy respectful conversation.

Some of the consequences mentioned for this US president has been: NATO will collapse. You will be known as the president destroying our international trades. You will loose the support you have in the people who has been voting for you. Some interpret such statement as an escalation of conflict. But is actually not. It’s a concern about following consequenses and its talking about realistic outcomes.

In some cases it is so, that if you say: You can step over my boarders, humiliate and belittle me and it will have no consequences, the owner of power will simply use his spreadning af fear and mistrust etc. to gain the territorie that he want. Simply because it’s possible. He might not very clearly posses the needed morality or sense of respect for others himself. So you have to put out very clearly for him where your limits are.

Some of us have been growing up with less or no rights to have or state boundaries. If that is the case it can be stressful and diffucult to set limits and frame boundaries. It’s something that you can learn by practicing. A child can not always set boundaries for itself, because the adults have the last word and are much more powerfull. As an adult, a child who had its boundaries crossed or were not able to set a line, might have difficulties both sensing itself and also speaking its own voice, including setting boundaries. That actually just make the subject even more important.

It is a skill to say yes or no. It is a skill to stay inside oneself and express oneself in the way you are comfortable with at this point in your life.

To find safety in all this, greenlanders might meantime tell yourself: I am safe. Right now, right here, I am safe. I am inviting safety in as a part of me. I am allowing myself to feel safe – in the middle of what seems to feel insecure or chaotic. Remember that you are not alone. You have tons of people by your side. Who also want a world in which we can show respect toward each other and live side by side collaborating by dialogue and diplomacy in a respectful tone.

But for christ sake: Why has the world even become a place in which I feel an urge to teach people how to seek safety inside themselves?  Safety is something we should naturally make for each other, isn’t it.

When we stand together we are far more ontouchable towards outer threats, whatever they may be, or if they at all at a realistically level even excists or is just yelling from a frustrated bear.

Greenlanders have every right to stay peacefully in their own country without feeling any threat from foreign great powers.