Uncovering the Real Story: Why Trump is Eyeing Greenland and What It Means

Share this @internewscast.com

President Donald Trump is once again suggesting the United States should control Greenland — a widely-criticised pursuit an administration official reportedly says “is not going away”.

Trump’s interest in the autonomous Danish territory is long-standing. He first suggested purchasing it in 2019 during his first term, with his rhetoric ramping up again in early 2025 as he began his second.

The US president wants to acquire Greenland to bolster national security and “deter our adversaries in the Arctic region”, according to the White House, and has not ruled out the use of military force to do so.

Greenland’s government is set to participate in a meeting next week with U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Danish officials, following renewed interest from the U.S. in the Arctic territory, Greenland’s foreign minister announced on Wednesday.

Denmark’s Prime Minister, Mette Frederiksen, has said a military takeover of Greenland would mark the end of the NATO military alliance.

An anonymous senior U.S. official informed Reuters that President Trump’s pursuit of acquiring Greenland remains active during his current term, suggesting that the initiative “is not going away.”

The island’s pivotal location between Europe and North America renders it a crucial element for the U.S. ballistic missile defense system. Furthermore, Greenland’s rich mineral resources align with the United States’ strategic goals to decrease its dependence on Chinese imports.

Greenland is an autonomous territory of Denmark, not a country. Its population of about 56,000 are full citizens of Denmark and, by extension, the European Union.

Although controlled by Denmark, Greenland’s capital, Nuuk, is over 3,500km away from Copenhagen and sits between the Arctic and North Atlantic Oceans, off the coast of North America.

Though Greenland is not an independent NATO member, it is included under Denmark’s membership in the alliance.

A map showing the geographical relation between the US, Denmark and Greenland.

President Trump has maintained that Greenland holds significant military importance for the United States, criticizing Denmark for allegedly failing to adequately protect the island. This criticism persists despite Denmark’s commitment last year of 42 billion Danish crowns (approximately $9.73 billion) to enhance its military presence in the Arctic region.

On Tuesday (Wednesday AEDT), Greenland’s government announced it had requested an urgent meeting with Rubio, along with Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen, to address the situation and “clear up certain misunderstandings.”

What could Trump do next?

Frederiksen this week said Trump “should be taken seriously” as she urged the US to “stop its threats”.

“If the US chooses to attack another NATO country militarily, everything stops, including NATO and thus the security that has been provided since the end of World War Two,” Frederiksen said on Monday.

NATO countries, comprising North American and European states, have a responsibility to come to the defence of a fellow member under attack.

Not everyone believes Trump would use military force to take Greenland, despite the White House not ruling out such a move.

When asked about the Europeans’ joint statement on Tuesday (Wednesday AEDT), US special envoy to Greenland, Jeff Landry, told US broadcaster CNBC: “Security should be a major concern for the United States”.

He said Trump was offering Greenland economic opportunities but he did not think the president would take it by force.

“I think that the president supports an independent Greenland with economic ties and trade opportunities for the United States,” Landry said, adding that the US had more to offer than Europe.

The US official who spoke to Reuters on condition of anonymity, said options include the outright purchase of Greenland by the US at an unknown price or forming a Compact of Free Association (COFA) with the territory.

A COFA agreement grants citizens of the partner country the right to live, work, and study in the US without a visa, while the US provides economic and defence assistance to the nation.

“Diplomacy is always the president’s first option with anything, and dealmaking. He loves deals. So if a good deal can be struck to acquire Greenland, that would definitely be his first instinct,” the official said.

The White House said in a statement to Reuters: “The president and his team are discussing a range of options to pursue this important foreign policy goal, and of course, utilising the US military is always an option at the commander-in-chief’s disposal.”

Concerns over NATO, Russia and China

Jamie Shea, a former NATO official and now a professor of strategy and security at the University of Exeter in the UK, said Trump’s push to control Greenland could threaten the NATO alliance.

A US military takeover of Greenland would put NATO allies at odds, “hollow out” the alliance and make it “far less cohesive and effective”.

“It would certainly create probably NATO’s biggest crisis in history,” he told ABC Radio National on Wednesday morning.

“It would certainly push the Europeans much faster down the road where they’re going ready, which is to try to spend more on their own defence, invest more in their own defence capabilities and weapons and try to reduce their dependency on the United States.”

Nordic foreign ministers — from Finland, Iceland, Norway, Sweden and Denmark — in a joint statement this week said had increased their investments in Arctic security and offered to do more in consultation with the US and other NATO allies.

Shea said Trump’s concerns over Russian or Chinese influence over Greenland are unfounded.

“Greenland is part of NATO’s integrated defence system. The Europeans send military forces there from time to time. The US already has a military base on Greenland.

“The idea that somehow NATO and Europe are neglecting Greenland’s defence, and therefore the United States has to step in, strikes me as a little bit overblown, quite frankly.”

— With additional reporting by Reuters news agency.