During a press conference on January 7, 2025, President-elect Donald Trump refused to rule out the possibility of using military force or economic coercion to acquire Greenland. When asked to consider the possibility at his home in Florida and during a private club, Trump replied, “No, I can’t assure you on either of those two. But I can say this: We need them for economic security. The Panama Canal was built for our military.” For weeks upon election, the future president has repeatedly expressed his strong desire to take control of the country. Earlier this week, Trump even called it an “absolute necessity” to make Greenland part of the U.S. territory.
Trump’s reasoning for establishing control of Greenland lies in the past. Ever since the 19th century, the U.S. has made several attempts to purchase Greenland from Denmark, which currently has control over Greenland. In 1946, America made a formal offer of $100 million to buy Greenland, and although Greenland did not agree at that time, many think that the situation could be different now. During a poll in December 2016, 64% of Greenlanders voted in favor of independence from Denmark. Trump and multiple geopolitical experts have analyzed and shared the benefits of Greenland possession for the U.S.
Control over Greenland would benefit the U.S. through its strategic location and resources. Greenland is the shortest route from Europe to North America and stands as a vital location towards improving the U.S. ballistic missile warning system. Due to this strategic military location, Trump enforced that owning Greenland was vital for U.S. security. However, experts question whether Greenland’s abundant raw materials played a role in his decision. Prospering in raw materials such as oil, gas, and rare earth metals, Greenland’s natural resources possess a high demand in the electric car industry and are especially used for manufacturing military equipment. Earlier after Trump’s election, China has threatened to restrict its exports of critical minerals and technologies to the U.S., implying the possibility of Trump finding an alternate source. Having this in mind, Klaus Dodds, the professor of geopolitics at Royal Holloway University, suggested, “I think Greenland is really about keeping China out.”
On January 9, Denmark responded to Trump’s statements. Denmark openly acknowledged that it had been neglecting Greenland’s defense, and Danish Defense Minister Troels Lund Poulsen told journalists, “We have neglected for many years to make the necessary investments in ships and in aircraft that will help monitor our kingdom, and that is what we are now trying to do something about.” Because Trump has refused to rule out military force to take control of Greenland, Denmark’s responsibility of the country’s military defense requires Denmark to act quickly. Although the Danish government wants to avoid conflict with the new U.S. administration, they have asserted that Greenland was not for sale. Additionally, Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen shared that she had asked for a meeting with Trump later that day, but it was unlikely to expect one before his inauguration on January 20. In recent days, Denmark has sent private messages to Trump’s team expressing willingness to discuss boosting security in Greenland and increasing U.S. military presence.
The next day on January 10, Greenland’s prime minister addressed the situation. He shared that while he understood Trump’s interest in the island, Greenland’s people did not want to become Americans. Furthermore, Greenlandic leader Múte B. Egede asserted, “Greenland is for the Greenlandic people. We do not wish to be Danish; we do not want to be American. We want to be Greenlandic. However, Egede stated that he was still open to discussions about what “unites” the countries, not ruling out the possibility of Greenland joining the U.S.
Ever since Trump has expressed his desire to control Greenland, anxiety has run along Denmark and many other European countries. Because Denmark and the U.S. are both part of the European Union, many Europeans were shocked and found it distasteful that a future U.S. president would consider using force against an ally. Not only us Denmark part of the EU, but Denmark is also part of the NATO alliance, where the U.S. stands as a leading member. Regardless of which country controls Greenland in the end, this event is likely to spark future tensions between the U.S. and Europe.
Written by Claire Liu
