Published 12/23/2025 15:09
President Donald Trump once again vehemently stated that the United States “needs” Greenland for “national security” reasons, reigniting a diplomatic controversy with Denmark. In an interview this Tuesday (23), in Mar-a-Lago, Trump criticized the Nordic country for “not having an Army” and for allegedly neglecting the Arctic territory. The declaration comes days after the appointment of Jeff Landry, governor of Louisiana, as “special envoy for Greenland” — a measure immediately classified as “totally unacceptable” by the Danish government.
Donald Trump’s renewed interest in Greenland goes beyond rhetoric: the US president insists that the Arctic territory is “essential to national security” and does not rule out coercive measures to ensure influence over the island. The declaration reignites a diplomatic crisis with Denmark and confronts the right to self-determination of the approximately 57,000 Greenlanders — 90% of whom are indigenous Inuit — who vehemently reject any attempt at annexation.
In response to the appointment of Landry — who has already publicly defended the incorporation of Greenland into the USA — Danish Foreign Minister Lars Løkke Rasmussen summoned the American ambassador and demanded respect for the kingdom’s sovereignty and territorial integrity. “Greenland is an inseparable part of Denmark and is not a tradable asset,” he said. Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen reinforced: “Greenland is Greenlandic”, remembering that any decision about the future of the territory rests exclusively with its people.
The European Union demonstrated solidarity with Denmark, with the presidents of the European Council, António Costa, and of the Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, reaffirming that “territorial integrity and sovereignty are fundamental principles of international law”. Trump’s rhetorical escalation, combined with the presence of Donald Trump Jr. on a “private” visit to Greenland this week, intensifies tension with traditional allies and calls into question the credibility of North American diplomacy in the Arctic region.
Trump strategy targets minerals, security and influence in the Arctic
Trump’s interest in Greenland is not new — it dates back to 2019 — but it has taken on a more aggressive tone under the argument that the island is vital for access to strategic minerals, such as rare earths and uranium, and to contain the growing influence of China and Russia in the Arctic region. Analysts warn, however, that any attempt at annexation would ignore both international law and the will of the approximately 57,000 inhabitants, most of whom are Inuit.
Greenland holds one of the world’s largest known deposits of rare earths — crucial elements for green technologies, batteries and military defense. Furthermore, its strategic location between the Northern Sea Route and the Northwest Passage will become even more relevant as melting Arctic ice opens up new trade routes by 2050. For the US, preventing powers like China and Russia from expanding their presence in the region is a priority. Beijing has already tried to invest in infrastructure and mining on the island, but was blocked under pressure from the US and the European Union.
Since the 1950s, the US has maintained the Pituffik Space Base — formerly Thule — in Greenland, the country’s northernmost military installation. Its main function includes ballistic missile surveillance (early warning); tracking satellites and objects in space; North American aerospace defense, in cooperation with the North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD); and support for scientific and climate operations in the Arctic. Despite its presence, the sovereignty of the territory belongs to Denmark — and, increasingly, to the Greenlanders themselves, who have had autonomy since 2009.
Strategic interest vis-à-vis Russia e containment of Chinese influence
Although the US has no public plans to “militarize” the island in the traditional sense (such as installing combat troops or offensive bases), the American military presence is already significant and likely to expand. This base is considered strategic for US national security, especially given the modernization of Russian nuclear forces and growing Chinese interest in the Arctic region.
The Greenlandic population views any attempt at external interference, especially with military motivations, with suspicion. Furthermore, excessively militarizing Greenland could provoke a symmetrical response from Russia, accelerating the arms race in the Arctic — a hitherto relatively stable region.
Russia maintains a strong military presence in the Arctic, with more than 40 bases, S-400 air defense systems, advanced radars and a fleet of nuclear icebreakers. Furthermore, Moscow claims sovereignty over sea lanes and vast areas of the ocean floor, including stretches of the Eastern Arctic that stretch toward the North Pole.
Greenland, due to its geographically opposite position to the Russian coast, serves as a privileged vantage point for monitoring Russian military activities in the Arctic Ocean and intercontinental missile flight paths. Any Russian attempt to project power into the North Atlantic would pass near or under Pituffik surveillance.
Although China does not border the Arctic, it proclaims itself a “near-Arctic state” and invests heavily in infrastructure, research and natural resources in the region. Beijing unsuccessfully sought to invest in mining, airports and satellite stations in Greenland — which raised security alerts in Washington and Brussels.
The US fears that China will use its civilian presence as a front for intelligence operations or gaining political-economic influence in critical territories. An independent — and potentially more vulnerable — Greenland could, in the view of American strategists, become an entry point for Beijing into the Western Hemisphere.
Therefore, US pressure to block Chinese investments on the island has been constant, both under Trump and Biden.
Although the US already has a robust military presence, any significant expansion would depend on authorization from Denmark — which controls Greenland’s defense and foreign policy — and the political consent of Greenlanders.
Currently, there are discussions about: modernizing the infrastructure at Pituffik Base, including capabilities to support drones and anti-missile defense systems; increased cooperation with NATO in Arctic exercises, with the participation of Danish, Norwegian and American troops; protection of emerging shipping lanes such as the Northwest Passage.
However, there is no indication that the US intends to deploy offensive strike forces (such as medium-range missiles or ground combat units) on the island. The focus remains on deterrence, surveillance and defense.
Greenlandic population rejects US annexation
Despite their desire for independence from Denmark — 75% support secession at some point in the future — Greenlanders categorically reject the idea of becoming part of the United States. Recent newspaper research Sermitsiaq points out that only 6% of the population supports this hypothesis. Greenlandic Prime Minister Múte Egede took advantage of external pressure to accelerate the internal debate: he announced that he will propose a referendum on full independence, stating that “the time has come to remove the shackles of colonialism”.
Prime Minister Múte Egede firmly stated: “Greenland is ours. We are not for sale and never will be.” He calls the current relationship with Denmark the “shackles of colonialism”.
Colonial history and autonomy at stake
Although Greenland has been autonomous since 2009, Denmark still controls defense, foreign policy and finance. The island receives around 500 million euros annually from Copenhagen — almost half of its budget. This economic support is seen by many Greenlanders as a brake on immediate independence, even among those who value their sovereignty. While Trump evokes historical analogies such as the purchase of Alaska, scholars remember: unlike in the 19th century, today territories are not sold without the consent of their people. And in Greenland, the answer is clear: “we are not for sale”.
Although there have been previous purchase attempts — such as Truman’s $100 million offer in 1946 — the current context is radically different. Greenland enjoys a legal right to self-determination, and any transfer of sovereignty would require popular consent. “Trump acts with a 19th century colonial mentality”, criticize experts. His pressure, however, could have the opposite effect: accelerating the island’s path towards independence, far from both Denmark and the USA.
In December 2024, King Frederick X updated the Danish royal coat of arms, replacing the medieval crowns with a polar bear — symbol of Greenland — and a ram, from the Faroe Islands. The move was interpreted as a clear message: Greenland and the Faroes are inseparable parts of the kingdom, not “tradable assets”. Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen reinforced: “Greenland is Greenland — and only its people decide its future.”
With information from The Conversation
Source: vermelho.org.br
