What Will President Trump Do About Greenland?

In the realm of international politics, President Donald Trump’s interest in acquiring Greenland remains one of the most audacious and discussed foreign policy pursuits of his administration. Greenland, an autonomous territory of Denmark, is strategically positioned with vast natural resources and growing geopolitical importance. While the idea of purchasing Greenland sparked widespread debate, questions remain about how the U.S. might secure its interests in this Arctic territory.

Trump’s Interest in Greenland

The U.S. interest in Greenland is not new. During World War II, American military bases were established there to protect strategic interests, including Thule Air Base, which remains operational today. Greenland’s untapped mineral wealth, including rare-earth metals, and its key location in the Arctic have become increasingly valuable as climate change opens new shipping lanes and resource extraction opportunities.

In 2019, President Trump proposed purchasing Greenland, likening the acquisition to a “large real estate deal.” Denmark quickly rejected the proposal, with then-Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen calling the idea “absurd.” Despite this, Trump’s interest reflected a broader recognition of Greenland’s growing strategic importance.

Why Greenland Matters

Geopolitical Significance: Greenland’s Arctic location provides a vantage point for monitoring Russian activities in the region, where military and economic competition is intensifying. The U.S. has long viewed Greenland as a critical part of its Arctic strategy, particularly as melting ice caps create new maritime routes and ease access to valuable resources.

Economic Value: The territory is rich in rare-earth metals—crucial for technology industries—as well as potential oil and gas reserves. The opening of the Arctic could allow for large-scale extraction, making Greenland an economic prize in a resource-driven global economy.

Climate Change and Arctic Governance: As ice melts, the Arctic’s geopolitical importance is escalating. Greenland’s strategic location positions it as a key player in discussions on Arctic governance, shipping lanes, and climate policy.

Potential Approaches and Challenges

While Trump’s proposal to purchase Greenland was rejected, the U.S. has other avenues to strengthen its influence in the region.

1. Strategic Partnerships: The U.S. could pursue closer collaboration with Greenland’s government, enhancing economic ties and increasing military cooperation. For instance, investing in Greenland’s infrastructure could bolster its economy while reinforcing its American presence.

2. Infrastructure Investments: Increased funding for projects such as ports, airports, and mining infrastructure would position the U.S. as a major partner in Greenland’s development, while also securing strategic access to its resources.

3. Arctic Policy Leadership: Engaging in multilateral Arctic governance initiatives—such as the Arctic Council—would enable the U.S. to shape regional policies collaboratively, maintaining influence in Greenland while addressing broader Arctic challenges.

Global Implications

Trump’s interest in Greenland ignited mixed reactions globally. Critics viewed the proposal as a neo-colonialist approach, undermining Denmark’s sovereignty and Greenland’s autonomy. Others argued that securing Greenland would serve U.S. national security and economic interests, countering the rising influence of Russia and China in the Arctic.

The Kingdom of Denmark, including Greenland’s local government, firmly opposed the idea of a sale, emphasising Greenland’s autonomy. Any future U.S. initiatives will need to navigate these sensitivities, balancing strategic interests with respect for sovereignty and international law.

Conclusion

Greenland’s strategic importance will only grow as climate change reshapes the Arctic. While President Trump’s bid to purchase Greenland was widely dismissed, it underscored the increasing focus on the region’s geopolitical significance. Moving forward, the U.S. can pursue alternative strategies—such as partnerships, investments, and leadership in Arctic governance—to secure its interests while respecting the autonomy and sovereignty of Greenland and Denmark.

As the global competition for Arctic resources intensifies, the U.S.’s approach to Greenland will remain a critical aspect of its foreign policy. Whether through military cooperation, economic investment, or multilateral engagement, the path forward will require diplomacy, respect for international norms, and a long-term strategic vision.

Dr Brian Reuben is the Executive Chairman of the Sixteenth Council.