Denmark Prepares for Russian “Invasions of NATO Lands”

Continues Supporting Ukraine War and Tripling War Budget

“We have decided to offer Ukraine NATO membership. But it is also clear that we must all agree on it if it is to happen,” said Denmark’s Defense Minister Troels Lund Poulsen following the Ukraine Defense Contact Group meeting at NATO headquarters in Brussels on February 13.

Poulsen must have referred to the previous U.S. president’s wish for Ukraine to be in NATO, because the new president’s defense minister, Pete Hegseth, said the opposite following Donald Trump’s 90-minute telephone talk with Vladimir Putin: No NATO for Ukraine, and give up territory, meaning Donbas and Crimea, which joined the Russian Federation by referendum.

The call came the day before the NATO meeting. Trump said he and the Russian president had “agreed to have our respective teams start negotiations immediately”—meaning this would bypass Volodymyr Zelensky and Europe.

Hegseth asserted, at the NATO Brussels meeting, that Trump was the “one man in the world” capable of bringing both sides together, and insisted U.S. attempts to negotiate peace were “certainly not a betrayal” of the Ukrainian soldiers fighting Russian forces.

Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov said Putin supported Trump’s idea that the time had come to work together. A date to begin peace negotiations has not been set.

Poulsen and other European leaders, as well as Ukraine’s Volodymyr Zelensky, appeared flustered by being left out of Trump-Putin’s upcoming peace-in-Ukraine meeting. Denmark and other EU-NATO leaders say they will continue to send weapons to Ukraine for an unknown period, thus diverging from their decades-long dependency upon and support for all U.S. wars. (See my CAM Scandinavian series.)

While deftly defying the U.S.’s new government decision to end the proxy war against Russia, Poulsen and other defense ministers expressed relief that the U.S. would not leave NATO. However, President Trump and his defense secretary said Europe should increase their defense funding from 2% of GNP to 5%. Denmark is suggesting it could increase its current share of 2.4% to 3.5%. Denmark and other European leaders are already succumbing.

In 2024, the official defense budget figure was $5 billion. Denmark’s additional “donations” to Ukraine’s war, as of August 2024, was $10.28 billion plus an additional $760 million for EU’s Ukraine Fund.

The day following NATO’s Brussels meeting, Poulsen said that, with new “war taxes,” the sum could reach $14 billion annually, that is three times as much for just national defense.

In Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen’s six years as government leader, with two different cabinets, the defense budget has nearly doubled. She is proud that Denmark’s population of six million people is number one in donating the most aid per capita of the 52 countries which are participating in the proxy war against Russia, and is number four in absolute funding in sending weaponry, tanks and jets.

Intelligence Report: Russian Threat Against the Danish Commonwealth

The Danish government and the mass media do not mention that, if Russia invades one NATO country, all others are required to defend the one attacked, according to Article 5 of its charter.

Denmark’s Defense Intelligence Service (FE) at least mentions Article 5 as a deterrent for Russia to invade one of Europe’s NATO countries. On February 9, FE released its “View 2024” report. It concluded that the likelihood of a possible invasion of one or more NATO countries increases as Russia’s “balance of [military] power shifts in its favor”—over the 30 European countries, if the U.S. and Canada were not to engage.

The 32 NATO countries have a total of 3.33 million troops (2022) compared to Russia’s 850,000.

Six hundred million people inhabit the 30 European NATO countries, compared to Russia’s 140 million. The two North American countries have 335 million and 40 million.

One wonders how these Danish spooks can be serious! What could motivate such futile aggression, especially since much of Russia’s huge territory has not been explored, and untold quantities of minerals exist there. Yet FE presents the possibility that the U.S. might not “support European NATO countries in a war with Russia,” which would encourage Russia to do battle against just 30 countries with four times the population of Russia.

Alas, ordinary Danes believe this irrational propaganda. Even my love’s reading group believes that Russians lust after conquering Europe. All but her obey the constant reminder to prepare for three days of food and water provisions with oil lamps and flashlights expecting that electricity fails, and no government contact can be expected when/if Russia invades.

The Defense Intelligence Service report continues: “Russia sees itself in conflict with the West and prepares for a war against NATO. This does not mean that a decision has been taken to start such a war, but Russia is rearming and building the capacity to take such a decision.”

Russia’s capacity to wage war against Europe generally “depends also on how the war develops in Ukraine…[Once the war ends] Russia could free its great military resources and extend its military ability to conduct a direct threat to NATO.”

FE spooks propose a three-stage strategy, given that Russia wants to take over Europe:

Stage 1: “In six months [Russia] will be able to fight a local war against a country at its border.” Russia has 14 borders; six of them are members of NATO.

Stage 2: “In two years [Russia] will constitute a reliable threat against one or more NATO-lands and thus be ready for a regional war against several lands in the Baltic Sea area.”

Stage 3: “In five years [Russia] will be ready for a large-scale war on the European continent where USA will not be involved.”

The rest of the report encourages Denmark/Europe to escalate war production, rearm massively in order to deter Russia from its apparent thirst for warring against an entire continent. That thirst also includes “threatening behavior…with far-reaching plans…in the Arctic…[including] control right up to the North Pole.”

FE admitted that a direct Russian takeover of Greenland and the Faroe Islands is not expected, given U.S. interests in the Arctic. Nevertheless, Denmark is increasing its military-surveillance presence in that area several fold. Those measures do not prevent hybrid instrument attacks.

FE concludes: “If Russia obtains more resources to rearm in the Arctic, it is probable that Russia will continue and possibly increase its offensive behavior.”

Hard Core Europeans Ready to Send Troops

“Ukraine’s Western partners have been quietly working on a plan to send troops to [Ukraine], an AP report claimed on Saturday. Britain and France are leading the effort, though details remain scarce.” 

After Trump was elected in November 2024, some European leaders met with Zelensky, in December, at NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte’s residence in Brussels. They came from Britain, France, Denmark, Germany, Italy, Poland and the Netherlands.

“I won’t get into the particular capabilities but I do accept that, if there is peace, then there needs to be some sort of security guarantee for Ukraine, and the UK will play its part in that,” Britain’s Prime Minister Keir Starmer said, on February 13, if Ukraine does not come into NATO.

Addressing the Munich Security Conference one day later, Zelensky said that, if Ukraine is not accepted into NATO, another NATO will have to be made in Ukraine, an “Armed Forces of Europe.”

He and other European leaders meant it was “unacceptable” that the United States would negotiate terms of peace in Ukraine without its own leader and European NATO leaders involved. While some of them mull over the idea of sending their own uniformed troops to protect Ukraine, the prime minister of Europe’s number one weapons donor—Denmark’s Frederiksen—skirted the issue. She is waiting for Yankee troops to occupy her country at any time. She is one of many European leaders banking on fortifying their national armies, in order to deter further Russian intrusions.

Danish Media in Shock

Since the FE’s latest report, followed by Trump-Putin talk, and the NATO and Munich meetings, Denmark’s media have been saturated with alarming articles and editorials; TV and radio broadcasts, all bemoaning the new reality that Denmark and Europe can no longer rely on the U.S. to go to war, at least in their zone.

A major TV debate program, “Deadline” paired off a political journalist and an academic political analyst on the topic of whether Trump is a fascist or not. That subject, in and of itself, was unheard of concerning any leader in the United States of America Racist Military Empire (US-ARME).

Former FE chief analyst Jacob Kaarsbo told the Christian Daily: “Donald Trump’s approach to peace in Ukraine is a knee drop for Putin. He expects nothing from Russia…Putin perceives that Trump does not believe in democracy, and that he will rather make a deal with Russia than stand fast with that, which holds Europe and USA together.”

Christian Daily’s headline five days following the “intelligence” report was “Europe and Denmark have a long way to go to be able to take care of themselves.” The sub-head stated that this is “the worst security situation since 1939,” thus suggesting Putin as another Hitler.

My hope that Trump’s semi-isolationist presidency would encourage Denmark and Europe to look inwardly and see the need for finding their own sovereignty—which would be based upon peaceful cooperation with the world instead of the “good ole bang-bang you’re dead” Yankee winner-takes-all approach—is clearly not on their agenda.

West Historic Aversion to Russia’s Sovereignty

There are never any media reports, or politician references, to the historical context of the West’s actions and threats to take over or annihilate Russia. Great Britain has long wanted to quell Russia, and fought with France against Russia’s Patriotic War of 1812.

In the summer of 1918, the UK, U.S. and 15 other countries invaded Russia while World War I still raged after the new revolutionary Russia withdrew from World War I to establish its vision of Peace, Land, Bread. So subversive were they.

Democratic President Woodrow Wilson sent 13,000 troops, part of 300,000 (70,000 Japanese) to prevent Russia from building a cooperative, socialist society, in order to abolish greedy capitalism’s winner-take-all ideology and profiteering. The Russian aristocratic White Army had about one million troops. Russia’s working people and a quickly organized Red Army fought those forces until total victory in 1925.

Twenty years later, after the Soviet Union led the victory over Nazi-Fascist European forces, the UK-U.S. tried again to conquer Russia and the entire Soviet Union’s 15 republics. Even before the last bullet was fired in Europe, Prime Minister Winston Churchill devised Operation Unthinkable. Had Churchill the atomic bombs he needed from his understudy Harry Truman, he would have invaded Moscow, Stalingrad and Kiev, in the summer of 1945.

Churchill had asked President Truman for use of his atomic weapons, but Truman needed the few being made for Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Two other factors prevented such an untoward act. Labour Party leader Clement Attlee defeated Churchill in an election and took office on May 23. He treated Russia/USSR as real allies.

Nevertheless, Truman heeded Churchill’s wish and started his own operations to destroy the Soviet Union following Japan’s surrender. The Cold War/Truman Doctrine organized several operations: Pincher (1945); Broiler, Frolic, Sizzle (1948); Trojan, Shakedown and Dropshot (1949).

Dropshot called for 400 atomic bombs to be dropped upon 200 targets over 100 Soviet cities. The United States government planned to attack in 1950-51.

This would have made the U.S. an unstoppable empire to end all empires. Yet, two conscientious scientists at the Manhattan Project—Klaus Fuchs and Ted Hall—gave the Soviets secret formulas, which enabled them to complete their own atomic bomb ahead of the time estimated by the U.S.

Journalist Dave Lindorff wrote: “What put a thunderous halt to the U.S.’s planned genocidal attack was the surprise on August 29, 1949, when the Soviets tested their atomic bomb, which was based on Ted Hall and Klaus Fuchs’s information that they gave the Soviets. Truman, the U.S.’s intelligence apparatus, Pentagon strategists and nuclear scientists were stunned. They had not expected the Soviets to get their own bomb before 1953 or 1954.”

For the complete story, see Lindorff’s co-produced documentary film, A Compassionate Spy; and his book, Spy for No Country: The Story of Ted Hall, the Teenage Atomic Spy Who May Have Saved the World (Amherst, NY: Prometheus Books, 2023).

Since 1991, Denmark has followed the U.S. in all its aggressive wars. Two weeks before Russia’s February 24, 2022, military incursion into Ukraine, PM Frederiksen told the world that her country was inviting Yankee troops and weaponry of known and unknown types to occupy Denmark permanently.

“Denmark and the USA have a special bond—a strong community of values, and since the end of World War II, the USA has been Denmark’s most important ally, and the guarantor of our security and safety through NATO,” she told a news conference on February 10.

“That is why we are starting concrete negotiations with the USA on a new Defense Cooperation Agreement (DCA)…with closer Danish-American cooperation.”

A similar DCA was signed with Sweden and Finland during the same month; Norway already had such an agreement. The DCA will mean 47 U.S. bases. They will be separate or part of already-existing national military bases: Sweden 17, Finland 15, Norway 12, Denmark starting with 3).

The U.S.-ordered DCA treaties allows it to place weapons without the nation’s knowledge or investigation. The U.S. is also the sole police-judge of any crimes committed by U.S. personnel.

“We Cannot Count on USA…”

One of four Christian Daily articles published on February 14 concerning the new U.S.-Europe paradigm was written by security-political analyst Jens Worning. The former Danish general consul in St. Petersberg concludes that Denmark’s geopolitical position is in an “historic existential crisis, because our most important ally challenges us.”

Denmark’s three-year long logo “Ukraine Shall Win,” Worning surmised, “died” at NATO’s meeting the day before he wrote. “Is it still valid to call USA our ally?”

Worning’s last words echo the newspaper’s own editorial: “In practice, we cannot count on USA as our guarantor for military security…Trump sends a clear signal that aggressive dictators deserve more room than invaded lands.”

---

CovertAction Magazine is made possible by subscriptions, orders and donations from readers like you.

Blow the Whistle on U.S. Imperialism

Click the whistle and donate

When you donate to CovertAction Magazine, you are supporting investigative journalism. Your contributions go directly to supporting the development, production, editing, and dissemination of the Magazine.

CovertAction Magazine does not receive corporate or government sponsorship. Yet, we hold a steadfast commitment to providing compensation for writers, editorial and technical support. Your support helps facilitate this compensation as well as increase the caliber of this work.

Please make a donation by clicking on the donate logo above and enter the amount and your credit or debit card information.

CovertAction Institute, Inc. (CAI) is a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization and your gift is tax-deductible for federal income purposes. CAI’s tax-exempt ID number is 87-2461683.

We sincerely thank you for your support.

---

Disclaimer: The contents of this article are the sole responsibility of the author(s). CovertAction Institute, Inc. (CAI), including its Board of Directors (BD), Editorial Board (EB), Advisory Board (AB), staff, volunteers and its projects (including CovertAction Magazine) are not responsible for any inaccurate or incorrect statement in this article. This article also does not necessarily represent the views the BD, the EB, the AB, staff, volunteers, or any members of its projects.

Differing viewpoints: CAM publishes articles with differing viewpoints in an effort to nurture vibrant debate and thoughtful critical analysis. Feel free to comment on the articles in the comment section and/or send your letters to the Editors, which we will publish in the Letters column.

Copyrighted Material: This web site may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. As a not-for-profit charitable organization incorporated in the State of New York, we are making such material available in an effort to advance the understanding of humanity’s problems and hopefully to help find solutions for those problems. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. You can read more about ‘fair use’ and US Copyright Law at the Legal Information Institute of Cornell Law School.

Republishing: CovertAction Magazine (CAM) grants permission to cross-post CAM articles on not-for-profit community internet sites as long as the source is acknowledged together with a hyperlink to the original CovertAction Magazine article. Also, kindly let us know at info@CovertActionMagazine.com. For publication of CAM articles in print or other forms including commercial internet sites, contact: info@CovertActionMagazine.com.

By using this site, you agree to these terms above.

---

About the Author