Anthony Scaramucci, who briefly served as White House communications director before transitioning to an investment role, disclosed on social media that top Republican senators have delivered a serious warning to President Donald Trump regarding his aggressive approach to acquiring Greenland. Scaramucci wrote that GOP senators have communicated a clear message: "Invade Greenland, and you will face impeachment and removal from office." He described the development as "encouraging."
This assertion emerges amid reports that several Republican lawmakers view any military attempt to seize the Danish territory as constituting an "illegal war of aggression." Such an action, they assert, could trigger impeachment proceedings despite the Republican majority in Congress.
One senior Republican, Senator Thom Tillis of North Carolina, articulated on record that members across party lines would band together to insist on congressional approval if there were indications of imminent U.S. military deployment to Greenland. He said, "If there was any sort of action that looked like the goal was actually landing in Greenland and doing an illegal taking … there'd be sufficient numbers here to pass a war powers resolution and withstand a veto." Tillis’s comments suggest a stronger than usual bipartisan defense of legal and procedural boundaries concerning military action.
Another Republican voice, Representative Don Bacon from Nebraska, went further by forecasting impeachment in response to such a move. Bacon described Trump's Greenland obsession as "the dumbest thing I've ever heard" in remarks to the Omaha World-Herald, emphasizing the depth of GOP disapproval regarding the plan.
The concerns are not limited to the legality of military intervention but extend to the broader strategic outlook. Senate Majority Leader John Thune acknowledged unease among Republican leadership regarding the options under consideration related to Greenland. Speaking to reporters, Thune said, "There's certainly not an appetite here for some of the options that have been talked about or considered," signaling a lack of support for aggressive measures.
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell has similarly voiced opposition, warning that employing force against a U.S. ally such as Denmark would represent "an unprecedented act of strategic self-harm." McConnell cautioned that such a move could "incinerate" NATO alliances, underscoring the potential damage to longstanding international partnerships.
The backlash among Republican ranks intensified following President Trump’s imposition of new tariffs on Denmark and other European allies that have openly opposed U.S. attempts at asserting control over Greenland. Senator Lisa Murkowski of Alaska described these tariffs as "unnecessary, punitive, and a profound mistake." She warned that the tariffs were already prompting NATO partners to redirect their focus and resources toward the dispute over the Arctic, complicating collective defense priorities.
Criticism has not been confined to Republican voices. A diverse group of U.S. officials including Senator Bernie Sanders (Independent-Vermont), former National Security Adviser John Bolton, Senator Chris Coons (Democrat-Delaware), and Representative Don Beyer (Democrat-Virginia) have also spoken out against Trump's tariff threats concerning Greenland. They argue these actions fracture NATO cohesion and unintentionally provide strategic advantages to both Russia and China, adversaries who have long sought influence in the Arctic region.
President Trump has consistently defended the strategic importance of Greenland to U.S. national security. He highlights the island's Arctic location, its mineral resources, and the enduring presence of the U.S. military at Pituffik Space Base (historically known as Thule Air Base) as justification for his focus on the territory.
The controversy over Greenland thus encapsulates a complex mix of legal, strategic, and diplomatic concerns within the U.S. political establishment. Prominent Republican figures have expressed strong resistance not only to the concept of a forced acquisition but also to punitive trade measures that strain alliances. As the debate intensifies, the possibility of impeachment proceedings serves as a pointed reminder of constitutional checks on executive power in matters of war and foreign policy.
Trade, alliances, and military strategy are tightly intertwined in this episode, demonstrating the challenges of executing bold geopolitical ambitions without broad political consensus and international support. The involvement of high-profile senators and congressional leaders across the political spectrum reflects widespread apprehension about the ramifications of unilateral military action in Greenland.