The Time Has Come to Take the Car Keys from Donald Trump

Anyone who has ever faced the crisis of an elderly parent who has suffered mental and physical decline can probably recall the moment when you had to intervene and take the car keys from your father or mother. Certainly not a happy time, but the given the possibility of the impaired senior citizen causing an accident that could kill others it was the right decision.

I think we have come to that moment with Donald Trump. It is time to invoke the 25th amendment to the US Constitution. The 25th Amendment to the United States Constitution sets the rules for presidential and vice‑presidential succession and for dealing with a president who is unable to perform the duties of the office. It was proposed after President John F. Kennedy’s assassination and was ratified in 1967 to clarify gaps in the original constitutional text. Under Section 4, the vice president plus a majority of the principal officers of the executive departments (or another body designated by Congress) can declare that the president is unable to discharge the powers and duties of the office, making the vice president acting president immediately. If the president disputes this, Congress must decide; a two‑thirds vote in both houses is required to keep the vice president as acting president, otherwise the president regains authority.

The final straw for me is Trump’s declarations that he is going to seize Greenland and put it under the full control of the US Government. Greenland is an autonomous, self‑governing territory within the Kingdom of Denmark, not an independent state and not part of the United States. It remains under Danish sovereignty while exercising extensive home rule over its internal affairs. Greenland’s Self‑Government Act recognizes the Greenlandic people as a distinct people with a right to self‑determination and provides a legal pathway for independence through a referendum in Greenland followed by negotiations with Denmark. Internationally, other states (including the United States in their defense agreements with Denmark) recognize Danish sovereignty over Greenland, treating it as part of the Danish realm but with autonomous governance.

Unlike Denmark’s relationship with Greenland, where a metropolitan power maintains full sovereignty over a large, culturally distinct, self-governing territory with extensive autonomy and an explicit legal pathway to independence, the United States holds several foreign territories — e.g., Puerto Rico, Guam, and the US Virgin Islands — that are unincorporated… Meaning they are under full U.S. sovereignty without constitutional guarantees of statehood or independence, and none match Greenland’s degree of self-determination or resource control.

Trump’s declaration that he does not recognize international law — a view emphatically echoed by Stephen Miller, Trump’s Deputy Chief of Staff, and Marco Rubio — is a dangerous and foolish admission. Trump’s claim that might makes right, is an ancient aphorism expressing the idea that power determines justice or morality, rather than any inherent ethical principle. Thucydides (c. 410 BC) most famously articulated the idea in his History of the Peloponnesian War, writing:

The strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must.

This Melian Dialogue passage is widely seen as the foundational expression of realist power politics. Plato’s Republic (c. 375 BC) features Thrasymachus declaring that “justice is nothing else than the interest of the stronger,” a view that Socrates eviscerated.

Trump is trying to justify his aim to seize Greenland by insisting that Russia and China are poised to take that chunk of territory if we don’t. This is ridiculous. Russia already has ample access to the Artic. Three of Russia’s 11 time zones border the Arctic Ocean along its northern coastline and, with a fleet of eight icebreakers, Russia is quite capable of working in the Artic region without resorting to conquering Greenland. I would note that the US only has one functioning icebreaker, so even it it gets control of Greenland it will be several years before the US has enough icebreakers to work meaningfully in the Artic.

Trump’s claim that the US must control Greenland in order to buttress US national security is specious. Because of Greenland’s legal status with Denmark, and the fact that Denmark is part of NATO, any attack by Russia or China would constitute a causus belli justifying the invocation of Article 5, which would be an attack on NATO.

NATO members have reacted with a mix of alarm, solidarity, and diplomatic pushback to Donald Trump’s renewed declarations in early January 2026 that the U.S. needs Greenland for national security reasons, refusing to rule out military force or tariffs to achieve control over the Danish territory. This has escalated tensions within the alliance, with many viewing it as a direct threat to Denmark’s sovereignty and NATO’s cohesion, potentially risking the alliance’s survival.

As Greenland’s administering power, Denmark has been at the forefront, with Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen warning that any US military action against the island would spell “the end of NATO” and the transatlantic partnership. Denmark has bolstered its military presence on the island and coordinated with allies for joint exercises, framing these as defensive measures to enhance Arctic security without escalating threats. Foreign Minister Lars Løkke Rasmussen met with Vice President JD Vance and Secretary of State Marco Rubio on January 14, but described a “fundamental disagreement,” emphasizing dialogue while rejecting annexation. Public opinion in Denmark strongly opposes any sale or takeover, with polls showing nearly half viewing the U.S. as a threat.

Several European leaders issued a joint statement on January 6, affirming that “Greenland belongs to its people” and that only Denmark and Greenland can decide its future, while standing in “full solidarity” with Copenhagen. Signatories included the UK, France, Germany, Italy, Poland, and Spain, who condemned tariffs as undermining transatlantic relations and risking a “dangerous downward spiral.” Countries like Sweden, France, and Germany have deployed small military contingents to Greenland for training and exercises, signaling a united front to deter intimidation and bolster NATO’s Arctic presence. The UK is considering similar support, while Italy’s Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni urged a stronger NATO role in the Arctic without ruling out US moves.

NATO as an organization has remained publicly silent, prompting criticism from European capitals that it fails to defend member sovereignty, contrasting with the EU’s proactive stance. In the US, bipartisan figures like Republican Senators Thom Tillis and Lisa Murkowski have condemned Trump’s tariffs on allies as “bad for America” and divisive for NATO, warning it benefits adversaries like Putin and Xi. Canada, a NATO member with Arctic interests, has urged breaking from US influence in related contexts but not directly addressed Greenland.

The NATO countries are acting like a battered spouse. Last night I learned that one of my niece’s was beaten by her husband, leaving her with a broken nose. Instead of calling the police, having her husband charged and securing a restraining order, my niece is doing what so many battered women do… Saying nothing and staying in a dangerous relationship. That is exactly how Europe is behaving. The leaders of Europe should be united in outrage and Trump’s declared intention to trash international law and illegally seize a territory just because he wants it.

If Trump proceeds down this path it will likely mark the end of NATO… Maybe that is his real reason for this reckless, perilous proposed action.

Trump’s dangerous rhetoric and actions are not confined to Greenland. The Russians believe that the US facilitated the December 28/29 drone attack on Putin’s official resident in Novgorod; Trump’s CIA failed to spark a color revolution in Iran but continues to build up military forces for a future attack; and Trump ordered the kidnapping of Venezuela’s Nicholas Maduro, but has stopped short of executing a full regime change by sending US ground forces into Venezuela. We are only 16 days into the New Year and Trump is taking actions that run a risk of igniting multiple wars.

To be fair, Trump is not doing this on his own. He is being enabled by a variety of senior officials, including the CIA chief, John Ratcliffe. While I believe there are sufficient grounds to execute the 25th amendment, the reality is that Trump is surrounded by sycophants who are quite willing to endorse and encourage his lawlessness.