By: Geehan Kooner

Greenland, an unlikely geopolitical hotspot, is a quiet place remote behind its icy fjords. This vast island in the far north suddenly became a hot property, owing to Donald Trump’s statement in the US Congress, “We have to have Greenland, it is not a question of do you think we can do without it, we can’t”. The proposition by the United States to purchase Greenland was raised in 2019 as well, though ultimately unsuccessful, served as a stark illustration of the enduring strategic significance Washington places on the island.

Greenland, an island three times the size of Texas with a population of only 56,000, has historically been a quiet place. However, in recent years, as Arctic ice melts due to climate change, the island’s mineral wealth and potential new shipping routes have attracted the attention of major world powers. The U.S., Denmark, and even China and Russia have vested interests in Greenland’s future, leading to a renewed debate about its political status and security role.

Echoes of Empire: Greenland’s Danish Legacy

Inuit people have called Greenland home for thousands of years, with their culture deeply based in subsistence hunting and a strong connection to nature. Modern Danish colonization began in 1721, bringing Christianity, the Danish language, and European governance. Over the next two centuries, Danish rule imposed cultural and social changes that deeply affected the Inuit population. Families were separated, and traditional ways of life were disrupted, leaving a lasting legacy of trauma. Thus, Greenland has had some experience with land grabs.

Only after World War II, a slow process of decolonization started. In 1953, it became an official province of Denmark, and in 1979, it was granted home rule. Today, it is a semi-autonomous territory. It governs its own domestic affairs with Denmark still being responsible for security and foreign policy. Greenland has the right to declare full independence if it decides to do so in a referendum. And the government of Greenland says that is its goal. Even the Polls suggest a clear majority support. However, building the island’s economy is the biggest challenge on the way to independence. This is primarily the reason why Greenland has been looking for partners. It has representative offices in Iceland, the EU, the US and China. It has also signed cooperation agreements on mineral exploration with the US and the EU.  For Greenland, the US is an increasingly important business partner and has long guaranteed its security.

So, Trump’s interest could easily lead to a wider discussion about Greenland future away from Denmark. That is the reason why Denmark is seeking support from other European countries. It has been very clever on part of the Danish government to not make this an issue between the US and Denmark but between Europe and the US, because it is stronger together with the other European states.

U.S. Interest in Greenland: A Historical Perspective

The U.S. has long recognized Greenland’s strategic value. The cooperation between the US and Denmark on the island began during World War II, when Nazi Germany occupied Denmark, prompting the U.S. to establish military bases in Greenland to prevent a German invasion. The then Danish ambassador in Washington, Henrik Kauffmann agreed that the US should occupy Greenland and construct military bases on the island to prevent a German invasion. Greenland proved such a strategic asset, that in 1946, the US wanted to buy it from Denmark for a hundred million dollars in gold. The offer was rejected but both parties kept it secret at that time. Not long after both countries became founding members of NATO, Denmark agreed US troops should stay and in 1951, the two countries signed a Treaty on Common Defence of Greenland (1951 Greenland Defence Agreement) which is still in effect today.

Since the island is right between the US, Canada, the European Union and Russia and on the shortest route between the European part of Russia and the US, the US built here, with the permission of the Danish government, one of its most important radar stations at Pituffik.

The US facility was set up during the cold war to detect missile launches from the Soviet Union, and prepare to strike back. Today it remains the northernmost US military base in the world. Despite this significant US base, Greenland is actually a part of the Kingdom of Denmark. Denmark is a small European country of 6 million people. And its capital Copenhagen is further away from Greenland’s capital Nuuk, than Washington DC. Further, Denmark only has a light military footprint in Greenland, and only a few navy vessels monitor the shores.

“It is American power and not Danish power that provides security because the US base there is ultimately what’s guaranteeing their security and the Danes know that as well,” says Scott Barry Zellen (American researcher at University of Connecticut, specialising in arctic geopolitics). So, the fact that Greenland has a strategic role to play and a forward military presence for the US military, already means that they are part of the US security system.

Therefore, Trump’s 2019 proposition to buy Greenland was not new but echoed a long-lived U.S. interest in attaining ascendancy over the island. While Denmark dismissed the offer as absurd, the underlying motivations—security, economic potential, and geopolitical positioning—remain relevant today.

Military and Geopolitical Significance

Greenland’s geographical positioning between North America, Europe, and Russia endows it with strategic indispensability. The Arctic region is increasingly contested, with Russia expanding its Northern Fleet and China investing in Arctic infrastructure. Thus, surveillance is especially important between Greenland, Iceland and the UK, in this area between these three called the GIUK Gap. This naval chokepoint is a crucial part of NATO Strategy to detect and contain Russian ships, especially submarines moving between the Artic and the Atlantic.

Economic Potential: Rare Earth Minerals and Shipping Routes

Beyond its military relevance, Trump may also prize Greenland for another reason: its large and mainly untapped deposits of rare earth minerals, which are used in everything from cell phones to electric car batteries and at the moment China has a stranglehold on global supply.

However, Marc Jacobson, an expert on arctic security, says that it is important to remember that there is very little mining activity in Greenland. All these stories about Greenland riches in terms of mineral resources, are still far from the horizon. There are just two active mines in Greenland and only about a hundred people currently work in the Greenland mining sector. Exploration is very challenging. Mineral deposit site in the south of Greenland, Kvanefjeld, is said to be among the world’s top rare earth deposits outside China. But in 2021 the Greenland government stopped exploration there because the site also contains radioactive uranium and is close to populated areas. But it’s not just environmental concerns, extracting resources is a lot costlier here than in most other places. There are no roads linking Greenland settlements and the terrain is rough, with deep fjords, glaciers and icy mountain ranges.

Further, climate change is accelerating Arctic ice melt, opening up new shipping routes. Three of them in particular; the Northwest Passage through the top of the Canadian archipelago, the Northern Sea Route along Russia’s coast, and the transpolar route could significantly shorten maritime trade times between Asia, Europe, and North America. While these routes remain underdeveloped, they could transform global trade in the coming decades and reduce the dependency on the Suez Canal.

Greenland’s Path to Independence

Polls indicate that 85% of Greenlanders oppose becoming part of the U.S., but a majority support full independence from Denmark. The key challenge is economic sustainability. Denmark provides Greenland with an annual amount of about €500 million, nearly half its budget. Without this support, Greenland’s economy, currently dependent on fishing, would struggle.

Greenland is seeking alternative economic partnerships and has signed agreements on mineral exploration with Western powers, highlighting its intent to diversify economic opportunities. However, full independence would likely make Greenland more vulnerable to geopolitical competition among major powers.

Implications for the Future of Greenland

If Greenland were to gain independence and leave the security umbrella of NATO, it would undoubtedly make it  look and feel more vulnerable to Russian and Chinese influence but being owned by America won’t make Greenland safer, according to professor Klaus Dodds, an expert in arctic security. Experts fear that an American takeover would disregard Greenlandic culture and governance. The real security concern, however, is Trump-style rhetoric, which creates uncertainty, anxiety, fear and fuels tensions in an already contested region. Trump is talking about doing to Denmark what Putin is doing to Ukraine and what China wants to do to Taiwan. So, all that might be a transition to a new world order where Russia, China and the US might share the same strategic vision of spheres of influence being reestablished.

Greenland’s future is entangled in broader global power struggles. The U.S., Russia, and China have competing Arctic strategies, and Greenland may become a battleground for influence. Whether it remains part of Denmark, gains full independence, or falls under American control, Greenland’s geopolitical role is set to grow.

Greenland, once a remote and politically quiet territory, has emerged as a critical player in Arctic geopolitics. Its military significance, economic potential, and strategic location have drawn intense interest from the U.S., Denmark, and other global powers. While Greenlanders seek independence, economic and security concerns make the path uncertain. As the Arctic gain’s prominence in global affairs, Greenland will remain a key focal point in the evolving world order. So, the question which still remains unanswered is: In a world increasingly determined by the whims of great powers, will Greenlanders even get a say in determining their own future?