出大事了，普京向美国正式宣战，六字一出，特朗普不得不刹车

Core Viewpoint - The geopolitical tension surrounding Greenland's ownership has escalated, with President Putin formally challenging President Trump, intensifying the global focus on this dispute [1][3]. Group 1: U.S. Actions and Reactions - President Trump has threatened to impose tariffs on European countries that do not support the U.S. acquisition of Greenland, with a 10% tariff starting February 1 and a planned increase to 25% by June [5][6]. - European leaders, including Denmark's Deputy Prime Minister and Norway's Prime Minister, have condemned Trump's threats, asserting that Greenland's future should be determined by its people [6][9]. - The U.S. is reportedly preparing a purchase plan for Greenland, with estimates suggesting the transaction could cost around $700 billion, reflecting a long-standing interest dating back to the 1867 purchase of Alaska [11][13]. Group 2: Strategic Importance of Greenland - Greenland's strategic location between North America and Europe is crucial for military operations, with the U.S. already deploying F-35 jets at the Thule Air Base [13]. - The island is rich in rare metals and resources, including uranium and gallium, which are vital for defense and high-tech industries, making it an attractive target for the U.S. [15][16]. - The local indigenous population and the Greenlandic government have expressed strong opposition to the sale, emphasizing their desire to control resource development while facing financial dependency on Denmark [18]. Group 3: Russian Response - Russia has indicated it will respond aggressively if the U.S. attempts to annex Greenland, potentially deploying troops to the Svalbard archipelago, which could destabilize the region [19][24]. - The Svalbard Treaty mandates the area remain demilitarized, but Russia has already begun military preparations, including establishing a rescue center and deploying modified helicopters [22][26]. - The strategic significance of Svalbard is highlighted, as control over the archipelago would secure Russia's access to the Barents Sea, crucial for its nuclear submarine operations [24]. Group 4: Norway's Position - Norway, as the sovereign state of Svalbard, faces challenges in defending its territory against potential Russian aggression, with military response times being significantly delayed [28]. - The economic implications for Norway, particularly in its fishing industry, could be severe if tensions escalate, leading to limited defensive measures being taken [29]. - The EU's reluctance to activate its coercive mechanisms against the U.S. reflects the complex dynamics within NATO, as the U.S. remains a key ally and trading partner [31].