data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/65390/6539083775a2a6323243deb7d9fd79e6068b1dda" alt="Trump’s Imperialistic Fury: No Ally Is Safe – Ricardo Martins"
Trump’s latest imperialistic claims—ranging from annexing Canada to renaming the Gulf of Mexico—expose a blatant disregard for diplomacy, challenging international norms and testing global responses.
Trump’s Claims Are Imperialistic and Bypass Diplomacy
Donald Trump’s imperialistic ambitions to annex Canada, claim Greenland, regain control of the Panama Canal and rename the Gulf of Mexico to the Gulf of America are not just shocking in their scope but also in the way they have been announced.
Rather than using private conversations and diplomatic channels, Trump has opted for public declarations, a move that underscores his bullying approach to international relations. By airing these claims so brazenly, Trump seeks to impose himself on the global stage, projecting an image of power and control while dismissing the nuances of diplomacy.
This public posturing is no accident—it is a calculated tactic to intimidate and dominate, leaving little room for dialogue or dissent. Trump’s style reflects a fundamental disdain for diplomacy, which he perceives as weak, slow, and contrary to his transactional, deal-making persona as a businessman. Diplomacy requires patience, mutual respect, and an understanding of shared interests—qualities Trump seems to view as unnecessary or even counterproductive.
Instead, Trump favours unilateral action, prioritising quick wins and grand gestures over the careful building of trust and cooperation. This approach not only undermines the norms of international relations but also risks alienating allies, destabilising global partnerships, especially the European ones, and eroding the principles of sovereign nations that have governed international relations since 1648 with the Treaties of Westphalia and sustained seek for peace and collaboration for centuries.
His claims and how they are pursued reveal a dangerous shift towards an era where brute force and self-interest overshadow reasoned dialogue and mutual respect, in sum, diplomacy.
Global Reactions: A Dangerous Dubious
Surprisingly, responses have fallen far short of what the gravity of these ambitions demands, especially from Western democracies, with many responses lukewarm at best. World leaders and institutions appear hesitant, afraid, or worse, indifferent, to challenge this blatant overreach, which has the potential to destabilise close alliances and peace.
The international community’s silence or timid reactions risk normalising such reckless aspirations and allowing them to take root as a dangerous precedent. This lack of decisive action could embolden Trump and others with similar imperialistic tendencies, setting the stage for a future where diplomacy is sidelined in favour of unilateral aggression.
Differing Reactions from the Involved Leaders
The international reactions to Trump’s imperialistic claims have been mixed. In Latin America, there were clear-cut responses. Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum wryly suggested that instead of renaming the Gulf of Mexico (a name international and officially being used since 1607) to “Gulf of America,” perhaps the United States should be renamed “Mexican America,” citing an 1814 document predating Mexico’s constitution that used this name for the region.
Trump’s justification for his proposal? “We’re going to change it because we do most of the work there, and it’s ours.” There is also an intention of taking possession here.
The president of Panama Jose Raul Mulino firmly rejected the idea of the country losing control of the canal: “As president, I want to express precisely that every square meter of the Panama Canal and its adjacent zone belongs to Panama and will remain so. The sovereignty and independence of our country are not negotiable.”
In Canada, on the contrary, there was no official response from Prime Minister Justin Trudeau. Just one day after announcing his resignation on 7 January 2025, he issued a message on X (formerly Twitter), which wasn’t an official statement, saying: “There isn’t a snowball’s chance in hell that Canada would become part of the United States,” and in French: “Jamais, au grand jamais, le Canada fera partie des États-Unis.” However, this reaction was far too late after the first Trump’s bullying on Canada in Mar-a-Lago on 30 November 2025.
Some analysts suggest that his lack of response to Trump’s claims played a crucial role in Trudeau’s plummeting approval ratings during his final days, ultimately contributing to his decision to step down. Canadians felt they could not entrust their future to someone who appeared afraid to defend their nation and its very existence. This stands in stark contrast to the swift, sharp reactions of Latino leaders, as well as the Greenlandic and Danish leaders, who responded with clarity and strength to each of Trump’s claims within the same or the following day.
Not Everything is Rotten in the Kingdom of Denmark: A Nod to Shakespeare
In their turn, Greenland and Denmark offered robust responses to Trump, as one can see in the Danish media. The island is an autonomous territory but not sovereign. It is attached to Denmark. Greenland’s Prime Minister Múte Egede responded: “Greenland is ours. We are not for sale and will never be for sale. We must not lose our long struggle for freedom.”
Denmark’s King and Prime Minister standing firm against any encroachment on their territories. “We are all united and each of us committed to the kingdom of Denmark. From the Danish minority in South Schleswig—which is even situated outside the kingdom—and all the way to Greenland. We belong together,” said King Frederik.
The Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen has made it clear that Greenland is “not for sale and will not be in the future either. I don’t think it’s a good way forward to fight each other with financial means when we are close allies and partners.” She also said that the Danish government had requested a phone call with Trump, but no official response had been received.
Further, the Danish Foreign Minister Lars Lokke Rasmussen said: “We should take him seriously, but not literally.” And added: “I do not get any impression that we are in any foreign policy crisis,” dismissing the gravity of Trump’s claim, and added, that the government had “no ambition whatsoever to escalate some war of words,” and offered to engage in conversations. These remarks were seen by many as shamefully inadequate, failing to properly address the gravity of Trump’s actions.
Europe and NATO: Between Harsh Words and Inertia
The NATO Secretary General cancelled a press conference to avoid thorny questions over the subject. European leaders, such as German Chancellor Olaf Scholz and French President Emmanuel Macron said, “the EU won’t tolerate” a takeover of Greenland by the U.S., and added: “Europe is a strong continent and won’t be intimidated.”
However, it is hard to believe that Europe will not tolerate, as Europe has tolerated the U.S. destroying their Nord Stream pipelines, which brought the Old Continent, mainly Germany, to a catastrophic energy and economic crisis, pushing the right and far-right to power in several European countries.
From the European Union, an embarrassing silence. The President of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, and the Foreign Affairs Commissioner, Kaya Kallas—usually very outspoken—did not utter a single word.
Elsewhere, Colombian President Gustavo Petro reacted to the message in defence of the Central American country. Petro said in a message on X that he will be “on the side of Panama and the defence of its sovereignty until the last consequences.” Elsewhere, basically no responses.
In conclusion, Trump’s claims highlight that geopolitics is playing a bigger role on the global stage. Are Europeans prepared and willing to play boldly in response? This is a question I will explore in my next article.
Ricardo Martins ‒PhD in Sociology, specializing in policies, European and world politics and geopolitics