US allies push back on Greenland at Davos ahead of Trump address

(NEW YORK) — The man who opened fire at one of Mexico’s busiest tourist sites was allegedly influenced by violent acts in the United States, Mexican officials said Tuesday.

The deadly mass shooting occurred during the late morning Monday at the Teotihuacan pyramids, an archaeological site outside of Mexico City. The shooter fired upon tourists from atop one of the pyramids while armed with a revolver that he reloaded at least twice before dying by suicide, according to José Luis Cervantes Martínez, the attorney general of the state of Mexico.

One person was killed and seven others wounded by gunfire, officials said. Several people also suffered injuries in the ensuing panic.

“We all know that we had not seen anything like this in Mexico before,” Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum told reporters at a press briefing on Tuesday. “Based on information from the authorities, the individual showed signs of psychological issues and was influenced by incidents that occurred abroad.”

The gunman held a plastic bag containing 52 rounds of ammunition during the attack, according to Cervantes Martínez. The shooter also had a bladed weapon on him and handwritten materials reportedly related to violent incidents believed to have occurred in the U.S. in April 1999, the attorney general said.

The shooting occurred on the same day as the 1999 Columbine High School massacre.

“Evidence collected so far suggests a psychopathic profile of the attacker, characterized by a tendency to imitate violent acts that occurred in other places and at other times,” Cervantes Martínez said at Tuesday’s press briefing. “This phenomenon, known as a ‘copycat’ effect, is one of the lines of investigation in this case, as materials referencing violent acts and figures associated with such behavior were found.”

The gunman, identified as Julio César Jaso Ramírez, is not linked to organized crime and appears to have acted alone in a premeditated act, officials said.

“Investigative findings indicate that the attack was not spontaneous. The attacker had previously visited the archaeological site on several occasions, stayed in nearby hotels, and from there planned and carried out his actions,” Cervantes Martinez said.

The first report of an armed individual at the tourist site came at 11:20 a.m., officials said. State police and the Mexican National Guard responded and were also attacked. While returning fire, the gunman was shot in the leg by the National Guard, officials said. He shot himself while being subdued and died from a self-inflicted gunshot wound, officials said.

One person — a Canadian woman — was fatally shot and seven others suffered gunshot wounds during the attack, authorities said. Six others were also injured, such as from falls, in the incident, authorities said. Those injured were from Brazil, Canada, Colombia, the Netherlands, Russia and the U.S., officials said.

Sheinbaum said authorities are investigating how the attacker was able to enter the site with a weapon.

In the wake of the deadly shooting, Mexico will be increasing security at archaeological sites and other public locations across the country by increasing the presence of the Mexican National Guard and installing screening equipment, the president said.

“In light of this event, it is necessary to strengthen inspections to prevent anyone from entering an archaeological site or public space with a firearm,” Sheinbaum said.

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(LONDON) — European leaders hit back at U.S. President Donald Trump’s announcement that he would impose sanctions on nations that deployed small numbers of military forces to Greenland last week, as the president continues his push to acquire the Arctic territory.

Trump said Saturday that a 10% tariff would be imposed on all goods sent to the U.S. from Denmark, Norway, Sweden, France, Germany, the U.K., the Netherlands and Finland.

Trump said the new tariffs will come into force on Feb. 1, and will increase to 25% on June 1. The president said the measures would remain in place until the U.S. is able to purchase Greenland.

Greenland is a self-governing territory of the Kingdom of Denmark. Trump first raised the prospect of acquiring the minerals-rich island in his first term. Danish and Greenlandic politicians have repeatedly rebuffed such proposals.

European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen on Saturday said the bloc’s members will meet Trump’s pressure as a united front.

“We have consistently underlined our shared transatlantic interest in peace and security in the Arctic, including through NATO,” she wrote in a post to X. “The pre-coordinated Danish exercise, conducted with allies, responds to the need to strengthen Arctic security and poses no threat to anyone.”

“Tariffs would undermine transatlantic relations and risk a dangerous downward spiral. Europe will remain united, coordinated and committed to upholding its sovereignty,” von der Leyen said.

Kaja Kallas, the EU’s foreign affairs chief, suggested in a post to X that the escalating tensions between the U.S. and its European allies is a boon for Moscow and Beijing.

“China and Russia must be having a field day,” she wrote. “They are the ones who benefit from divisions among allies. If Greenland’s security is at risk, we can address this inside NATO.”

“Tariffs risk making Europe and the United States poorer and undermine our shared prosperity,” Kallas wrote, suggesting the furor was distracting from allied efforts to support Ukraine against Russia’s ongoing full-scale invasion.

The eight countries — all NATO members — threatened with the tariffs issued a joint statement on Sunday saying they “stand in full solidarity with the Kingdom of Denmark and the people of Greenland.”

The statement says tariffs “undermine transatlantic relations and carry the risk of a dangerous downward spiral.” The signatories added that they are “committed to strengthening security in the Arctic region as a shared transatlantic interest,” and in this context, the planned military exercise in Greenland, “poses a threat to no one.”

EU pushback against Trump came alongside criticism from national leaders.

“France is committed to the sovereignty and independence of nations,” French President Emmanuel Macron said in a statement Saturday, adding that “no intimidation nor threat will influence us, neither in Ukraine, nor in Greenland, nor anywhere else in the world when we are confronted with such situations.”

“Tariff threats are unacceptable and have no place in this context. Europeans will respond to them in a united and coordinated manner if they were to be confirmed. We will know how to uphold European sovereignty,” Macron said.

British Prime Minister Keir Starmer said, “Applying tariffs on allies for pursuing the collective security of NATO allies is completely wrong.”

“Our position on Greenland is very clear — it is part of the Kingdom of Denmark and its future is a matter for the Greenlanders and the Danes,” he said.

Swedish Prime Minister Ulf Kristersson said discussions are ongoing between the affected nations to build a coordinated response.

“We will not let ourselves be blackmailed. Only Denmark and Greenland decide on issues concerning Denmark and Greenland,” he said.

Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni said on Sunday that Trump’s decision to impose new tariffs was “a mistake and I do not agree with it.”

“The intention of some European countries to send troops, to take part in greater security, should have been understood not as an initiative directed against the United States but rather against other actors,” Meloni said.

Meloni said she spoke with Trump “a few hours ago” and “told him what I think.”

“A core meeting of the European Union has been organized but I believe that at this stage it is very important to talk to one another and that it is very important to avoid an escalation,” she added.

Trump has repeatedly suggested that U.S. sovereignty over the world’s largest island is necessary to ensure American security and blunt Chinese and Russian influence in the Arctic region.

“This is a very dangerous situation for the Safety, Security, and Survival of our Planet. These Countries, who are playing this very dangerous game, have put a level of risk in play that is not tenable or sustainable,” Trump posted on social media on Saturday, referring to deployment of small contingents of troops by European allies.

“Only the United States of America, under PRESIDENT DONALD J. TRUMP, can play in this game, and very successfully, at that!” he said in the post.

As a part of the Kingdom of Denmark, Greenland is covered by NATO’s collective defense clause. Greenland hosts the U.S. Pituffik Space Base and around 150 American troops, the U.S. having significantly downgraded its footprint from its high point during the Cold War.

A 1951 defense agreement grants the U.S. military access to Greenland. Danish politicians have repeatedly expressed willingness to work with Washington to expand the American and NATO presence there.

Danish officials have also sought to head off concerns about the supposed vulnerability of the Arctic. Last year, Copenhagen announced a $6.5 billion Arctic defense package in response to U.S. criticism that it had failed to adequately protect Greenland.

But such steps do not appear to have deterred Trump, who has said he would consider taking Greenland by force if other means to acquire the land fail.

A meeting in Washington, D.C., last week between U.S., Danish and Greenlandic representatives seemingly failed to de-escalate the standoff.

“It’s clear that the president has this wish of conquering over Greenland,” Danish Foreign Minister Lars Løkke Rasmussen told reporters after meeting with Vice President JD Vance and Secretary of State Marco Rubio. Rasmussen said that outcome was “totally unacceptable.”

Rasmussen said Saturday that the president’s threat came as a surprise, citing his “constructive meeting” with Vance and Rubio last week.

Rasmussen said in a statement that the purpose of last week’s military deployments to Greenland “is to enhance security in the Arctic.”

The continued U.S. focus on Greenland prompted protests there this weekend, with crowds of people turning out for a “Stop Trump” march through the capital Nuuk. Greenlandic politicians have collectively and repeatedly said they do not wish to join the U.S.

Trump’s efforts have also prompted congressional resistance. On Friday, a bipartisan group of House members and senators traveled to Greenland and said they had “constructive” conversations with members of Denmark’s parliament.

U.S. Sens. Jeanne Shaheen, D-N.H., and Thom Tillis, R-N.C., who were part of the delegation, released a statement Saturday warning that the tariff threat will hurt the U.S.’s relationships with its European counterparts.

“There is no need, or desire, for a costly acquisition or hostile military takeover of Greenland when our Danish and Greenlandic allies are eager to work with us on Arctic security, critical minerals and other priorities under the framework of long-standing treaties,” the lawmakers said in the statement.

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said on Saturday that Democrats will introduce legislation to block tariffs against countries who oppose a takeover of Greenland.

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(LONDON) — President Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu kicked off their joint military campaign against Iran in late February, urging the fall of the Islamic Republic.

“When we are finished, take over your government. It will be yours to take. This will be probably your only chance for generations,” Trump said, addressing Iranians in announcing the start of “major combat operations.”

A month of unrelenting combined U.S.-Israeli strikes appears to have significantly eroded Iran’s military capabilities and killed many of its most senior leaders, including Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who died alongside dozens of top Iranian officials in a series of airstrikes on his official residence in Tehran in the opening salvos of the war.

But despite Trump’s assertion that the “war has been won,” Iranian forces continue to launch attacks on Israel, regional U.S. bases and American partners across the Middle East, while commercial shipping through the strategic Strait of Hormuz remains constrained, with large numbers of cargo vessels in limbo on either side of the narrow waterway at the southern entrance to the Persian Gulf.

Trump has also asserted that there had been “complete regime change,” with the leaders the U.S. is now dealing with in recently announced negotiations “more moderate” and “much more reasonable,” the president told ABC News’ Jonathan Karl.

Trump named Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, the powerful speaker of the Iranian parliament, as the direct U.S. negotiating partner, though Ghalibaf has denied the assertion.

But in Tehran, the cadre of officials – Ghalibaf among them – emerging to take the reins of power appear as committed as the slain figures they are replacing, many of them veterans of the powerful Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), analysts have said.

The regime in Tehran, according to Danny Citrinowicz – the Israel Defense Forces’ former top Iran researcher, now at the Institute for National Security Studies think tank in Israel – “is weaker than it was before the conflict, but it is also more radical. The IRGC has further consolidated its influence over decision-making, eroding what little internal balance once existed within the regime.”

The war appears to have given Tehran long-term leverage over the Strait of Hormuz – a “weapon of mass disruption,” as described by Ali Vaez of the International Crisis Group during an online briefing hosted by the think tank this week.

If the Islamic Republic survives the war, and its immediate aftermath by suppressing simmering anti-regime movements, its new leaders may be emboldened to retain perceived strategic advantages, chief among them control of the Strait of Hormuz, analysts who spoke to ABC News said.

That regime sentiment seems to be crystalizing. Ghalibaf, for example, told the IRNA state news agency that Iran’s strategy now rests on its control of three pillars: “missiles, the streets, and the Strait.”

Inside Iran, some sense that shift. Darius – who did not wish to use his real name for fear of reprisal – told ABC News from Tehran of a growing sentiment that “the source of legitimacy for the Islamic republic is shifting” from the clerical establishment to the IRGC.

“Now, the de facto leaders of the country are the generals in the IRGC. And they are actually running the show at the moment,” Darius said.

IRGC ascendant

The IRGC was formed shortly after the Iranian Revolution by Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini in 1979, ultimately emerging as the new Islamic Republic’s primary tool for projecting its ideology and influence beyond its own borders.

The IRGC entrenched and expanded its power during the Iran-Iraq War from 1980 to 1988. With its battlefield exploits and ideological zeal, the IRGC came to embody the wartime concept of “sacred defense,” Johns Hopkins University professor Vali Nasr wrote in his recent book, “Iran’s Grand Strategy.”

Observers have long considered the IRGC to be the most powerful military, political and economic institution in Iran.

Even before the most recent U.S.-Israeli campaign against Iran, many experts warned that decapitation strikes or a push for regime change risked empowering the IRGC to seize the state’s other mechanisms of power – though others suggested the force had no need to openly seize control, given its de facto hold over the country.

The new supreme leader, Mojtaba Khamenei, the son of Ali Khamenei, served in an elite IRGC unit during the Iran-Iraq War, and analysts have suggested his candidacy was strongly supported by the force.

Mojtaba Khamenei’s newly appointed military adviser, Mohsen Rezaei, was drawn from the senior ranks of the IRGC, as was the new secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, Mohammad Bagher Zolghadr, who was selected to replace Ali Larijani when the latter was killed by Israeli airstrikes in mid-March.

Meanwhile, IRGC veteran Ghalibaf – who has reportedly long been close to Mojtaba Khamenei – remains alive and appears to be in a position of influence, one of the few top prewar officials to have survived the U.S.-Israeli campaign.

Inside Iran, some sense that shift. Darius told ABC News from Tehran of a growing sentiment that “the source of legitimacy for the Islamic republic is shifting” from the clerical establishment to the IRGC.

“Now, the de facto leaders of the country are the generals in the IRGC. And they are actually running the show at the moment,” Darius said.

Reading the ‘mosaic’

Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi credited a “mosaic defense” strategy with enabling the Iranian military to launch retaliatory strikes despite the killing of so many senior military officials in the opening hours of the U.S.-Israeli campaign.

That decentralized approach also appeared to cause some tactical confusion. Araghchi and Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian, for example, both denied Iranian responsibility for several reported Iranian drone and missile attacks in the region in the days after the war erupted.

A decapitated regime in Tehran may pose challenges to American negotiators seeking a peace deal, Citrinowicz said, telling ABC News that the killings have created a “worse” strategic situation by dispersing power.

The centralized decision-making power enjoyed by Ali Khamenei is no more, he said. “Now, how are you going to work with them? It’s going to be very hard to reach an agreement with them,” Citrinowicz said, referring to the newly emergent group of leaders.

Trump himself appeared to acknowledge a diffusion of power in Iran as a result of the American-Israeli assassination campaign. “We have nobody to talk to, and you know what, we like it that way,” the president said earlier this month.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio told “Good Morning America” this week there are “fractures” within the Iranian leadership, though he would not say with whom the administration is in contact.

Yossi Kuperwasser – the former head of the IDF’s military intelligence research division – told ABC News that the emergence of hardliners “was to be expected.”

“Once you eliminate Khamenei, he’s not going to be replaced by some wishy-washy character, but somebody who is committed to the cause and the IRGC is going to be in charge,” Kuperwasser said.

But Kuperwasser also noted that figures currently touted as Iranian negotiators, such as Ghalibaf, might not live to see the end of the war. Indeed, Larijani was often noted as among the prime negotiating candidates before his killing. “I’d guess there are going to be more eliminations,” Kuperwasser said.

As the war progressed, both U.S. and Israeli officials have distanced themselves from earlier suggestions of regime change. Instead, officials refocused the strategic narrative on their ambitions to degrade Iran’s conventional military – especially ballistic missile – and nuclear programs.

These targets, according to Kuperwasser, were always the Israeli priority.

“Simultaneously, we are trying to weaken the regime so as to create the conditions that can be used by the people of Iran in order to promote something that can bring about the removal of the regime from power,” Kuperwasser said. But that will not necessarily occur in the short term, he added.

‘Missiles, the street, the strait’

Citrinowicz said that whatever structure emerges to negotiate with the Trump administration will likely be influenced toward more hardline demands by the killing of its predecessors.

On the nuclear file, too, “it goes without saying” that Tehran’s outlook will have shifted, Citrinowicz said. Before the war, Iranian leaders had already publicly committed not to pursue nuclear weapons, though Tehran was refusing to accept Trump’s demands of zero enrichment. Now, Citrinowicz said, the new Iranian leadership “might find themselves rushing toward a bomb.”

Iran also has more leverage in the Strait of Hormuz than it did before the conflict, even with the significant military degradation that the U.S. and Israel appear to have inflicted. Officials in Tehran have suggested that Iranian control over the strait – and the requirement for those transiting it to coordinate with Tehran and pay tolls – is the new baseline.

Rubio hinted at long-term disruption in the Persian Gulf last week. “Immediately after this thing ends, and we’re done with our objectives, the immediate challenge we’re going to face is an Iran that may decide that they want to set up a tolling system in the Strait of Hormuz,” Rubio said.

Hamidreza Azizi of the German Institute for International and Security Affairs think tank said during the Crisis Group briefing that Tehran will be set on a conclusive settlement, not merely a ceasefire that would allow the U.S. and Israel to rearm and resume the conflict at a later date, as was the case after the 12-day conflict in June.

“Deep inside Iran’s strategic thinking, there is an understanding that ceasefires are only a means for the United States and Israel to buy time,” Azizi said. While before the conflict, Tehran appeared willing to make concessions on the nuclear file and other issues, now Iranian leaders see an opportunity to achieve what they were unable to across years of negotiations.

The endgame, Azizi said, could be one in which Iran preserves “some sort of leverage” over the Strait of Hormuz or secures “substantial sanctions removal.”

For its part, Citrinowicz said the U.S. appears to be scrambling. “There are so many people in the U.S. that understand this regime, but the administration is behaving like it’s Venezuela. It’s crazy,” Citrinowicz said, referring to the American operation in January to seize Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro and support his vice president, Delcy Rodriguez, as Maduro’s successor.

Last week, the U.S. delivered 15-point plan to end the war, which was widely interpreted as a blueprint for Tehran’s capitulation. Iranian demands are likewise maximalist, calling for reparations and for the U.S. to abandon its regional bases.

“Nobody’s getting their wish list,” Dalia Dassa Kaye of the UCLA Burkle Center for International Relations said during this week’s Crisis Group briefing.

In the meantime, the battlefield costs will rise and geopolitical implications deepen across the Middle East. “Even if this ends tomorrow,” Kaye said, the costs have already been paid. “It’s going to take years to recuperate the damage.”

“This is not something you put back in a box,” he added.

ABC News’ Desiree Adib and Somayeh Malekian contributed to this report.

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.