This week, the President-elect of the United States stirred quite a commotion by suggesting a potential military action against a European nation.
During a news conference on Tuesday, he claimed that the self-governing Danish territory of Greenland held significant importance for America’s national security and hinted that Denmark should be willing to relinquish it.
But when asked if he would reject the possibility of using military or economic pressure, he responded matter-of-factly, “I can’t assure you on either of those two.”
His words sent shockwaves through diplomatic communities, where discussions of annexation and land grabs typically raise eyebrows—at least on most occasions.
A representative from the UN Secretary General cut in, pointing out, “The UN Charter is crystal clear about the obligation of every member state to uphold the territorial integrity of other nations,” when queried about the comments made by Mr. Trump.
European leaders hurried to voice their dissent.
The Prime Minister of Denmark, Mette Frederiksen, along with Greenland’s leader, Múte Egede, did not hold back.
“The principle of the inviolability of borders applies across the board—whether you’re talking about countries to the east of us or the west,” declared German Chancellor Olaf Scholz. “Every state, big or small, must honor that.”
“Greenland is not for sale,” added Denmark’s Prime Minister with a firm tone.
It’s worth keeping in mind that Denmark has been a steadfast ally of the U.S. and a founding member of NATO.
Meanwhile, Greenland’s leader Múte Egede advised everyone to stay in their lane. He emphasized that while various nations may have opinions, “at the end of the day, Greenland belongs to the Greenlanders.”
So, what drives Mr. Trump to express such a strong interest in Greenland, even at the risk of upsetting his own allies?
During the same conference, Trump attempted to shed light on his motivation. “You don’t even need binoculars,” he said, gesturing broadly. “Just look outside; you’ve got Chinese ships and Russian vessels all over the place, and we can’t let that slide.”
Analysts pointed out that this marks a new phase in the rivalry between the U.S., China, and Russia, as reported by RTÉ News.
With its largely icy landscape and a population under 60,000, Greenland stands at the center of a modern-day rush for crucial resources and strategic leverage in the Arctic.
With climate change altering the Arctic landscape, new shipping routes are emerging.
“Greenland acts as a gateway to the Arctic, boasting vast amounts of rare earth oxides, substantial uranium deposits, and untapped oil reserves,” explained Velina Tchakarova from a geopolitical risk consultancy based in Vienna, Austria.
These rare earth elements play a vital role in manufacturing everything from smartphones to electric vehicles and even defense technologies.
Currently, China dominates the market, controlling approximately 90% of the global rare earth processing operations—elements critical for modern technology.
In recent years, China has poured resources into mining and refining these essential metals.
Some U.S. and European officials have expressed alarm about becoming overly reliant on China, especially if geopolitical tensions were to escalate.
Thus, Greenland’s largely unexploited mineral reserves have become tantalizing. “As global demand for essential minerals soars, Greenland’s resources are key to what some are calling the Fourth Industrial Revolution,” Tchakarova noted.
However, extracting minerals from Greenland proves to be an arduous and expensive task. Beyond mere extraction, most companies outside of China’s influence still struggle to process rare earth materials on a large scale.
Concerns extend beyond what lies beneath Greenland’s ice, as U.S. officials are wary of the increasing partnership between Russia and China in the Arctic, fearing it could upset the delicate power dynamics in a region of immense strategic importance.
Melting ice fuels a new cold war in the Arctic Circle. Greenland isn’t for sale, says its leader in response to Trump.
China has actively sought a foothold in Arctic affairs, declaring itself a “near-Arctic state” in 2018—even though it’s situated a hefty 1,450 kilometers away from the region.
With Russia’s ongoing invasion of Ukraine straining its international relations, the country has found an opening to strengthen ties with China.
As a result, the two nations have negotiated terms to develop the Northern Sea Route—a potential shipping pathway between Asia and Europe that stands to become accessible with the thawing of Arctic ice.
Just last year, they undertook their first coordinated military patrols in the area.
“The Arctic has evolved into a critical corridor for contemporary economic and military strategies, a new arena of rivalry between America and its competitors, China and Russia,” Tchakarova observed.
“Greenland represents the crown jewel in the U.S. strategy for Arctic dominance,” she further emphasized.
Greenland’s history is replete with overtures from the U.S.
Rarely a stranger to American interest, this icy outpost has always been deemed essential for U.S. defense. Donald Trump isn’t the first U.S. leader to express interest in claiming Greenland.
Back in 1867, President Andrew Johnson toyed with the notion of purchasing Greenland, contemporaneously with America acquiring Alaska from Russia.
When Denmark fell under Nazi occupation, the U.S. established a military presence in Greenland by setting up listening posts. Later, after World War II, President Harry Truman resurrected the idea of acquiring it outright.
Reports indicate that the U.S. offered Denmark a staggering $100 million in gold along with drilling rights to Alaskan oil, all for Greenland’s transfer. This deal never materialized, but it cemented a closer relationship between the U.S. and Denmark as they subsequently founded NATO in 1949.
At the height of the Cold War, approximately 10,000 American troops were stationed on Greenland, a number that has dwindled to about 200 today.
Pituffik Space Base, formerly known as Thule Air Base, serves as America’s cerebral nerve center for missile detection and space surveillance—strategically vital but not without its controversies.
In 1968, a U.S. B-52 bomber carrying four hydrogen bombs crashed near this base, releasing radioactive material for miles and contaminating local waters.
The incident angered the Danish government, particularly when they discovered that their ally had secretly stored nuclear arms on their territory. They demanded that the U.S. manage the site and take the radioactive waste back home—although a piece of one bomb has never been recovered.
Despite this ordeal souring relations temporarily, they managed to bounce back. A recent statement from the U.S. State Department accentuated, “The United States and Denmark maintain a strong, enduring security partnership focused on countering Russian aggression while promoting peaceful cooperation in the Arctic region.”
With Trump once again taking the lead, this partnership might be on shaky ground.
Marisol Maddox, a Senior Arctic Analyst at the Woodrow Wilson Center’s Polar Institute in Washington, cautioned that this strategy might not end well. Undermining long-established security ties with allies like Denmark could empower rivals like Russia and China, she warned. “The strength of the U.S. lies in its allies,” she remarked, pointing to a fundamental difference between the U.S. and China.
In the end, the choice isn’t merely America’s to make.
“This is a moment for Greenland to assert its agency,” Maddox said. “If the U.S. continues to make statements that feel aggressive and out of line, it won’t appear as an attractive ally.”
She encourages a dialogue, urging the U.S. to consider what Greenland actually wants and recognize the mutual benefits of a respectful partnership between the two nations.
Edited by: Ali Musa
alimusa@axadletimes.com
Axadle international–Monitoring
