First published in Eurasia Review, 22 January 2025

In his inaugural address, President Donald Trump declared: “The United States will once again consider itself a growing nation — one that increases our wealth, expands our territory, builds our cities, raises our expectations, and carries our flag into new and beautiful horizons.” While reiterating his vision of reclaiming Panama, Trump used his Oval Office remarks to highlight Greenland’s critical importance to U.S. national security. Emphasizing its strategic location, untapped resources, and potential to counter Russian and Chinese influence in the Arctic, Trump argued that Denmark could not effectively manage Greenland, framing it as a vital asset for global stability. His suggestion that the U.S. might acquire Greenland—even hinting at military intervention—sparked swift and sharp responses from Danish and Greenlandic leaders, who reaffirmed the island’s right to self-determination and firmly rejected any notion of sale. Despite the controversy, Trump’s rhetoric signalled the heightened geopolitical stakes in the Arctic and Greenland’s central role in shaping the emerging scenario.

Why Greenland Matters?

Greenland, the world’s largest island with a majority-Inuit population of 56,000, is a self-governing territory within the Kingdom of Denmark. Greenland manages its domestic affairs, including education, health, and natural resource development, while Denmark oversees foreign, defence, and security policies. Denmark being an Arctic state with its membership in the Arctic Council, Greenland’s geopolitics is critically important.

In 2024, Greenland unveiled its Foreign, Defence, and Security Strategy for 2024-2033, titled Greenland in the World – Nothing About Us Without Us. This strategic document reflects Greenland’s growing aspirations for autonomy and international presence. After a history as a colony and later a province of Denmark, Greenland achieved self-rule in 1979. The 2009 Greenland Self-Government Act further expanded its governance responsibilities and granted the right to pursue full independence. While most Greenlanders aspire to eventual independence, their economy’s heavy reliance on Danish subsidies complicates the path forward.

Greenland’s central location in the Arctic presents it unparalleled strategic significance, bridging North America, Europe, and the increasingly accessible Arctic waters. The island lies at the strategic location of emerging global shipping routes, such as the Northwest Passage and the transpolar corridor, which are becoming viable as Arctic ice melts. These routes promise to enhance international trade by significantly reducing shipping times and bypassing traditional chokepoints like the Suez and Panama Canals. Greenland’s contiguity to the GIUK Gap, a critical naval chokepoint connecting Greenland, Iceland, and the United Kingdom, further enhances its importance for monitoring and controlling access to the North Atlantic. Historically a Cold War hotspot for NATO operations against Soviet naval forces, the GIUK Gap has regained prominence with the resurgence of Russian submarine patrols and Arctic military activities.

In addition to its geographic positioning, Greenland hosts the U.S. Pituffik Space Base (formerly Thule Air Base), a vital installation for missile early warning systems and space surveillance. This facility indicates Greenland’s crucial role in U.S. and NATO defence strategies, particularly as geopolitical tensions in the Arctic intensify. The Arctic’s significance has been further raised following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022, which fractured relations between Russia and other Arctic states and spurred Finland and Sweden to join NATO in 2023 and 2024, respectively. With all Arctic nations except Russia now NATO members, Greenland’s strategic value within the alliance has grown substantially.

Greenland’s Resource Wealth and Geoeconomic Potential

Greenland’s vast natural resources make it a focal point for global energy transitions and economic interests. The island is rich in critical minerals, including rare earth elements (REEs) essential for producing batteries, wind turbines, solar panels, and advanced military technologies. As Western nations seek to reduce dependence on China, which dominates global REE supply chains, Greenland’s reserves have drawn significant attention. However, mining in Greenland remains challenging due to high costs, environmental concerns, and local opposition rooted in the potential impacts on traditional livelihoods. While Greenland had only two active mines as of 2023, its untapped reserves signify an opportunity for economic growth and geopolitical leverage.

Greenland also possesses significant oil and gas potential, though its government ceased issuing new exploration licenses in 2021, citing environmental and economic concerns. Moreover, the melting ice sheet—holding 20% of the world’s freshwater—and the island’s thriving fisheries contribute to its economic relevance. Fisheries form the backbone of Greenland’s economy, providing livelihoods and comprising its primary export sector. As climate change reshapes marine ecosystems, Greenland’s role in global food supply chains may expand further.
Despite these resources, Greenland faces challenges to fully capitalizing on its geoeconomic potential. Harsh environmental conditions, limited infrastructure, and high extraction costs hinder large-scale development. Furthermore, Greenland’s reliance on Danish subsidies complicates its path toward economic independence, a critical factor in the island’s aspiration for full sovereignty under the 2009 Greenland Self-Government Act. While most Greenlanders support eventual independence, balancing resource exploitation, environmental stewardship, and cultural preservation remains a delicate task.

Trump’s Greenland Ambitions

Donald Trump’s interest in Greenland reflects its strategic importance within Arctic geopolitics. As president, Trump described Greenland as essential for U.S. national security, citing its location, resources, and potential to counter growing Russian and Chinese influence in the Arctic. Trump’s assertion that Denmark was incapable of effectively managing Greenland sparked controversy, with his administration even hinting at the possibility of military intervention to acquire the island. These remarks drew sharp rebukes from Danish and Greenlandic leaders, who reaffirmed Greenland’s right to self-determination and rejected any notion of sale.

Trump’s focus on Greenland is part of his broader Arctic strategy, which emphasized U.S. dominance in the region. His administration’s policies, including executive orders to accelerate resource development in Alaska, indicated efforts to enhance U.S. energy security and reduce reliance on foreign supplies. Trump also linked Greenland’s strategic position to emerging shipping routes, highlighting its potential as a logistical hub and military outpost in the Arctic. While Greenland’s government expressed openness to business partnerships with the U.S., Trump’s rhetoric, including threats of economic sanctions against Denmark, strained diplomatic relations and raised concerns about Arctic stability.

The island’s geostrategic and geoeconomic significance has also attracted the attention of other global powers, particularly China and Russia. China’s Arctic ambitions, outlined in its 2018 white paper on the “Polar Silk Road,” include securing access to Greenland’s critical minerals and potential shipping lanes. However, Chinese investments in Greenland have faced setbacks due to local opposition and U.S. pressure, with several mining and infrastructure projects failing to materialize. Meanwhile, Russia’s militarization of the Arctic, coupled with its territorial claims under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), shows the region’s growing importance as a theatre of geopolitical competition.

Prospects for Conflict in the High North

Trump’s extraordinary interest in Greenland highlights the island’s vital role in Arctic geopolitics. Its strategic location, abundant resources, and emerging shipping routes make it a key player in the evolving dynamics of the High North. However, these same factors also make Greenland a potential flashpoint for conflict. The intensifying competition between major powers—the U.S., Russia, and China—over Arctic resources and influence raises the risk of territorial disputes and militarization in the region. Greenland’s growing autonomy and emphasis on self-determination further complicate matters, as local decisions on resource development and international partnerships will inevitably be linked with broader geopolitical interests.

As the Arctic continues to warm and its resources become more accessible, managing these tensions will require vigorous diplomatic efforts and adherence to international frameworks like UNCLOS. Greenland’s strategic importance, while an asset, could also become a liability if competing interests escalate into open conflict. Trump’s brash approach to Greenland emphasises the need for careful balancing of national security objectives, environmental sustainability, and respect for Arctic sovereignty to ensure long-term stability in the High North.