When the military refuses the Commander-in-Chief because the order is illegal

So according to the Daily Mail’s sources, Trump ordered special forces commanders to draw up a plan to invade Greenland, and the generals told him to fuck off.

Not hypothetically. They say he actually ordered it - the Joint Special Operations Command got the directive to draw up invasion plans for Greenland. And the Joint Chiefs of Staff are resisting, those sources say. Because it would be illegal. Because Congress wouldn’t back it - and Denmark is a NATO ally. Because you can’t just invade our friends.

The Daily Mail broke the story on January 11th. According to their sources: “The generals think Trump’s Greenland plan is crazy and illegal. So they are trying to deflect him with other major military operations. They say it’s like dealing with a five-year-old.”

Those sources say the generals are trying to distract the President with other military operations. How about we intercept Russian ghost ships? Or hit Iran? Literally anything except invading Denmark.

This came after two weeks of escalating threats. White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said on January 6th that “utilizing the U.S. Military is always an option” for Greenland. Stephen Miller went on CNN and refused to rule out force. He said “nobody’s going to fight the United States militarily over the future of Greenland.”

Denmark said hold my beer.

Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen warned that a U.S. attack on Greenland would mean the end of NATO. Not a diplomatic strain. The end. “If the United States chooses to attack another NATO country militarily, then everything stops.”

And then eight European countries deployed troops. Germany, France, Sweden, Norway, the Netherlands, the UK, Finland - all sent forces for Operation Arctic Endurance. On January 19th, General Peter Boysen, Chief of the Royal Danish Army, arrived in Greenland with combat soldiers trained in Arctic warfare. He’d already said he’s ready to defend the territory.

Trump’s response? Tariffs. On January 17th he announced 10% tariffs on all eight European allies, rising to 25% by June 1st, until “a Deal is reached for the Complete and Total purchase of Greenland.”

He’s threatening a trade war against NATO allies because they’re defending themselves against us.

Let’s talk about why the military said no.

The UN Charter prohibits the threat or use of force against any state’s territorial integrity. The NATO Treaty obligates us to defend Denmark. We have 21 bilateral defense agreements with Denmark since 1950.

An order to invade Greenland violates international law, domestic law, and seven decades of treaty obligations. The Uniform Code of Military Justice only requires troops to obey lawful orders. Military members swear an oath to “support and defend the Constitution,” not obey the president unconditionally.

A Washington Post op-ed spelled it out: “Confronted with an order from President Trump and Secretary Hegseth to seize Greenland from a treaty ally with whom we are at peace, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Dan Caine must reasonably and in good conscience decline to transmit, and relevant four-star combatant commanders refuse to execute, that order as illegal.”

Here’s what makes Venezuela different. On January 3rd, the U.S. captured Nicolás Maduro. That succeeded because Maduro had federal indictments, it was framed as law enforcement, and Venezuela isn’t a NATO ally.

Trump’s team thought that success meant they could keep going. According to the Mail’s sources, Stephen Miller and other policy “hawks” want to move quickly on Greenland “before Russia or China makes a move.”

One diplomatic cable, according to the Mail, describes the “worst-case” scenario as leading to “the destruction of NATO from the inside.” Some European officials suspect that’s the actual goal. “Since Congress would not allow Trump to exit NATO, occupying Greenland could force the Europeans to abandon NATO.”

House Speaker Mike Johnson tried damage control. “We’re not at war with Greenland. I don’t think anybody’s seriously considering that.”

Except the Mail’s sources say JSOC has the order and the Joint Chiefs are resisting. U.S. officials told the New York Times on January 20th that the Pentagon hadn’t been asked to plan an invasion. European troops are deploying. Denmark confirmed that under a 1952 standing order, Danish troops must “immediately take up the fight” if attacked. The government said Danish soldiers would shoot back if Greenland is invaded.

We’re in a situation where the Mail’s sources say U.S. military leaders think a presidential order would be illegal, and Denmark says its soldiers would shoot back if Greenland were attacked.

Trump said January 9th: “We are going to do something on Greenland whether they like it or not. I would like to make a deal, you know, the easy way. But if we don’t do it the easy way, we’re going to do it the hard way.”

Only 8% of Americans support invading Greenland. 73% oppose it. Members of Congress from both parties traveled to Copenhagen to support Denmark. Senator Ruben Gallego introduced a resolution to block Trump from invading. Congress warned that “any member of the military who takes part in the use of force against Greenland without congressional authorization would be carrying out illegal orders.”

The constitutional system is working as designed. The military’s duty is to the Constitution, not the president. When given an order that violates the law and treaty obligations, they’re required to refuse. The Mail’s sources say the Joint Chiefs have done that.

But we’re still in a constitutional crisis. If the Mail’s sources are right, the president is actively trying to order an illegal invasion. He’s threatening economic warfare against allies defending themselves. He’s claiming he doesn’t need international law and might have to choose between seizing Greenland or preserving NATO.

One diplomatic source told the Daily Mail the generals are trying to distract him with other military operations because they think his Greenland plan is “crazy and illegal” and it’s “like dealing with a five-year-old.”

The system is holding. For now. But the fact that it has to hold - that the Joint Chiefs are reportedly resisting presidential orders and trying to redirect him toward different wars - tells you everything about where we are.

SOURCES

https://www.cnn.com/2026/01/06/politics/us-options-greenland-military

https://www.cnbc.com/2026/01/06/trump-greenland-military-white-house.html

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2026/1/7/us-says-military-always-an-option-in-greenland-as-europe-rejects-threats

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/rubio-trump-buy-greenland-trump-push-military-option/story?id=128994685

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/trump-us-greenland/story?id=129069483

https://www.npr.org/2026/01/07/nx-s1-5670244/trump-greenland

https://www.military.com/daily-news/2026/01/15/european-troops-arrive-greenland-talks-us-highlight-disagreement-over-islands-future.html

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenland_crisis

https://www.trtworld.com/article/ddd3a27f1081

https://www.yahoo.com/news/articles/trump-orders-top-army-officials-140854137.html

https://www.ibtimes.co.uk/trumps-greenland-invasion-plot-sparks-pentagon-revolt-senior-military-chiefs-resist-orders-1769976

https://www.washingtonpost.com/ripple/2026/01/13/article/greenland-trump-military-illegal-orders/

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2026/1/20/denmark-sends-more-troops-to-greenland-amid-tensions-with-trump

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-15452323/Donald-Trump-orders-army-chiefs-plan-invade-Greenland-President.html

https://www.nytimes.com/2026/01/20/us/politics/pentagon-greenland-invasion-plans.html

Correction, September 28th, 2026: This essay first said as fact that Trump ordered the military to invade Greenland and the Joint Chiefs refused - that came from the Daily Mail’s unnamed sources, who said he ordered a plan, and U.S. officials told the New York Times on January 20th that the Pentagon hadn’t been asked to plan an invasion. It also said diplomatic cables described the worst case - the Mail quoted one cable.

Update, September 28th, 2026: A few lines now say who says so - the Mail’s sources on JSOC, the Joint Chiefs, Stephen Miller and the generals’ distraction plan, and Denmark on its soldiers shooting back if attacked - and others now say General Boysen made his “ready to defend” comment before he landed and that military law requires troops to obey lawful orders.