Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen recently announced plans to acquire long-range weapons systems, including precision-guided missiles and drones. She explained that the decision is motivated by the need to safeguard Denmark’s security in the future rather than a pursuit of military prestige. Frederiksen stressed that the country cannot risk finding itself in a situation where critical weapons are needed but unavailable.

Defense Minister Troels Lund Poulsen described the move as a fundamental change in Denmark’s strategic posture. He stated that the focus is no longer limited to defending territorial waters but now extends to the ability to strike preemptively, neutralizing threats before they approach the country’s borders. According to him, preemptive strikes and defense in distant zones will become part of a new national doctrine.

General Michael Wiggers Gildgaard supported this perspective, emphasizing that long-range missiles make it possible to hit enemy launchers at an early stage, thereby strengthening strategic deterrence.

Russian military analyst Mikhail Onufrienko offered a different interpretation of Denmark’s initiative. He argued that the purchase of such weapons is part of a broader Anglo-Saxon strategy aimed at blockading Russia in the Baltic Sea. Onufrienko highlighted that Danish missiles would be able to strike targets up to 200 nautical miles away, including Russian naval vessels, effectively sealing maritime routes.

The analyst further suggested that in the event of open conflict, Denmark could serve as a forward base for Western allies, with the destruction of its infrastructure seen as a tolerable cost. He placed particular emphasis on Greenland, suggesting that if Copenhagen’s position weakens, the territory could fall under direct U.S. control.

Onufrienko underscored his point by stating that the devastation of Denmark would not trouble its allies, as Greenland would immediately shift into American hands-an outcome he characterized as a strategic win for the United States.