When the fourth season of “Borgen” came out in 2022, almost ten years after the third, many people were shocked. The TV series that taught us about Danish politics is written by Adam Price, a screenwriter who is extremely popular in the country because he’s also a food critic and has worked as a TV chef, and above all, he’s a visionary. The fourth season opened not only with a prime minister, Signe Kragh, who closely resembled the country’s leader, Social Democrat Mette Frederiksen, but also with sanctions against a Russian oligarch who had participated in the invasion of Ukraine. Price was referring to the 2014 invasion, with the subsequent annexation of Crimea by Russia, but a week after that first episode aired, Vladimir Putin invaded Ukraine with the large-scale operation that is still ongoing today. Another theme of this season was oil discovered in Greenland: the fictional Danish government realizes there would be trouble, because Russia, China, and the United States would want to impose their power and interests in the Arctic. And there would also be problems with the Greenlanders, who have always been restless under Danish rule. And here we are, confirming the insights of a highly skilled screenwriter, with Denmark squeezed between Russia’s shows of force—which has been testing NATO’s resilience in European skies and seas (on land it has been organizing sabotage, spy networks, and electoral interference for years) – and Donald Trump’s America’s conquest ambitions, who from day one of his return to the White House has been saying he wants to annex Greenland to the United States. Denmark also holds the European semester presidency, which means that until the end of 2025 it has the task of facilitating internal negotiations on the budget, rearmament, security, immigration, and the future of the European Union: Price didn’t include this in the series – it’s never easy to portray EU mechanisms, you risk being boring – but weaving the fabric of European unity has now become an existential matter.
The Speech for European history books
Some say we will remember the speech that Mette Frederiksen gave on September 26 as the moment when Denmark, Europe, and NATO understood that the world has changed a bit more, has deteriorated a bit more, that Vladimir Putin isn’t sending his drones into European skies just to conduct a test, but because he’s ready to expand the war beyond Ukraine: it has always been his plan. Denmark is among the hardest-hit countries, having had to close its airports because of these anonymous aircraft flying without responding to information requests – somewhat like the “little green men” who invaded Ukraine’s Donbas in 2014, while Moscow denied they were its soldiers, only to later award medals to those who distinguished themselves in killing and subjugating Ukrainians: who knows if this time we’ll manage not to take years to call aggressions and aggressors by their names – and finds itself in the decidedly uncomfortable position of having to establish a response method, coordinating with the rest of NATO, which is divided and agitated. The speech that could enter the history books of our Europe is this: “Denmark, in recent days, has been subject to hybrid attacks. Drones have been sighted in various parts of the country, near critical infrastructure, both military and civilian. We must expect that these attacks may be repeated: they are attacks that have highlighted vulnerabilities; they are attacks designed to create insecurity and division; they are attacks meant to shake us, as individuals and as a society. I understand well that this situation raises many questions. Why weren’t the drones shot down? Why weren’t they discovered earlier? There will be a time when we must look back, review the events of recent days, and draw lessons from them. But here and now we – government and institutions – have a task that supersedes all others, and that is to protect Denmark, to put ourselves in a position to better counter hybrid attacks, as quickly as possible. Where do we stand? First: the authorities have raised the alert level and are preparing for various scenarios. This means, among other things, that both the Armed Forces and the police will be more present with anti-drone systems around critical infrastructure in the coming days. At the same time, the authorities are in close contact with our allies in order to rapidly strengthen Danish capabilities to detect and neutralize drones. Second: our authorities have the mandate to shoot down hostile drones, but naturally it is up to the competent authorities to make the operational assessment in the concrete situation, including assessments of specific security risks. Third: in recent days I have been in contact with several of my European partners, I have spoken with the German Chancellor, the British Prime Minister, the prime ministers of our neighboring countries, Sweden and Norway, and with the Finnish President. As well as being in close dialogue with the NATO Secretary General. And now we are, on the Danish side, in dialogue with NATO allies to understand how they can assist Denmark in the current situation, so that we can protect and defend our airspace. Hybrid attacks have not only hit Denmark: there have been incidents in Poland, Estonia, and Romania as well. Hybrid warfare is not war in the traditional sense: hybrid attacks aim to confuse us. To make us insecure. And they come from a cowardly enemy who doesn’t dare reveal itself. One time it may be drones, another time it may be cyber attacks, it may be what we call disinformation or influencing electoral processes or conspiracy theories spreading online. But regardless of the method, the purpose is always the same: to destabilize our societies so that we no longer have confidence in our authorities. And all of this underscores that the threat to Europe’s security is serious, and it is real. That is why in recent years we have undertaken a massive strengthening of our Armed Forces. And it is also why we continue to support Ukraine, which I believe can help us in this situation, because if there’s anyone who has experience fighting drones, it’s our Ukrainian friends. However, I must say that it will take time to rebuild Danish defense: I don’t ask for patience on this point because, to tell the truth, I don’t have much myself. But we are under pressure. And I ask for understanding that, even though we are acting, it is not possible to achieve results overnight, or from one year to the next. I must also say something else, and this is directed particularly at some parties in the Folketing (the Danish Parliament): the goal of hybrid attacks is not only to test our authorities or our readiness, it is also, as mentioned, to see how we react as a society and how we react politically. We must be vigilant. And if something doesn’t work, it must obviously be corrected. But we must also remain calm: this is not the time for hasty statements, political bidding wars, or declarations of no confidence in the authorities or the police. Because no responsible politician can ever guarantee to the Danish people that we can completely avoid hybrid attacks – it’s impossible anywhere, indeed, the opposite is probably true. There will be more sabotage, more hacker attacks, more drones, more broken undersea cables, more direct attacks inside European democracies, as we currently see in tiny Moldova. The fact that Denmark and Europe are subject to more serious and frequent hybrid attacks I consider a new reality. We will need to discuss defense and European security, including the establishment of an anti-drone wall. In other words: Europe must equip itself. And we must strengthen ourselves. And we must never let ourselves be intimidated. Because otherwise we cannot be Danish and we cannot be European either. And even though the authorities cannot draw certain conclusions about who is behind the hybrid attacks against our airports and other critical infrastructure, we can nevertheless note that there is primarily one country that represents a threat to Europe’s security, and that is Russia. And therefore, one last important point: there is no European country that can defend itself alone against Russia, not even Ukraine, which has been fighting courageously for more than three years now. And that is precisely why we have NATO, that is why we are expanding the European defense industry, that is why we are carrying out a historic strengthening here in Denmark. And the events of recent days only underscore how important it is to act, together, in Europe and in NATO.”
Sea-Armed
Any country, like Denmark, that borders the Baltic Sea knows it must deal daily with vulnerability and strength. The Baltic Sea is not a barrier – since Finland and Sweden joined the Atlantic Alliance, convinced by Putin’s war against Ukraine, it has been renamed NATO’s lake. But Russia has its head in the sea; there are many water outlets it has always pursued and tormented, and the Baltic is one of them. Everyone pays the price, including Denmark, with its island of Bornholm, from which fighter jets take off when they see a threat and which the Danish government is now trying to rearm and strengthen, just as it did during the Cold War. Bornholm is an outpost; its citizens, often annoyed by official maps in which the island is represented squeezed into a corner, have proposed alternative maps, with Bornholm at the center and the rest of the country shrunk in a peripheral corner. If you look at Baltic history, the reality is very similar to how these island Danes see it, aware that a danger has always loomed over the sea that determines its events and transforms destinies: the Russian ambassador to Denmark has called Bornholm “a threat.” Napoleon had renamed the Baltic “the waters of promise,” before him Tsar Peter I had called it the “sea of confusion.” Now that Putin threatens with drones, ships, and environmental crises, some have suggested condemning the Baltic and making it a “sea of poisons” to discourage any Russian ambition. Easy to imagine what Bornholm thinks of that.
Restoring Deterrence
To shoot down the drones or not, to activate NATO’s Article 4 or not, to go it alone or move united, to be intimidated by the Russians who have started evoking nuclear weapons again and who, at the height of this absolute reversal of the logic of aggression and defense, say: if you shoot down our drones, it’s war. There are the hawks, which are the northern and eastern European countries, along with the United Kingdom, who say that NATO’s deterrence can only be reestablished by giving a strong signal, and the Russians “don’t come here whining,” said Polish Foreign Minister Radoslaw Sikorski during the emergency meeting convened by Estonia at the UN Security Council: “You have been warned.” Then there are the cautious ones, and among these one could also include Denmark, which yes, calls for unity and collective response, but at the same time does not officially identify the drones that continue to disrupt its daily life. Many experts wonder how it’s possible that in that stretch of sky, sea, and land that has in its history and identity the scars of Russian violence, there is so much confusion: perhaps the so-called “attribution,” that is, giving a name and origin to drone launches, is part of the gradual construction of a new deterrence? Perhaps yes, or perhaps it has to do with Trump.
Last for conquest
Mette Frederiksen was the first European leader to experience Trump’s change of pace from his first to second term. Not that the American president was ever docile with Europeans, but if he sent his attack-dog vice president, J.D. Vance, in February to lecture us about our cultural illiberalism (and look at how he censors at his discretion now), with Denmark he immediately spoke a more military language. Vance himself went to Greenland, to the base that monitors air movements hostile to NATO, and with his irredeemable paternalism said that no, the military probably won’t be needed, but one cannot ignore the Greenlanders’ will for independence and one cannot leave them alone either, since Russia and China are ready to extend their influence there. Frederiksen started touring NATO’s European capitals asking for support: if Trump wants to conquer Greenland, will you help me defend it? Everyone says yes, of course, but if the Alliance’s readiness is at least doubtful regarding Putin’s declared threat, imagine what it might be regarding the fact that NATO’s main partner, the founder, the pillar, is waging war on another NATO country. It’s a scenario no one wants to consider and indeed people cling hopefully to the fact that Trump has said in hawkish terms: let’s shoot down hostile drones entering the Alliance’s airspace. But then who knows if this volatile and vindictive president will defend Denmark and other countries in Russia’s crosshairs, or if he’ll stall or, more likely, ask for something in return, like the world’s largest island, up there in the Arctic.
