Don't Dismiss President Trump's Greenland Moves
During my first visit to Denmark last October, I took a canal cruise around the capital city Copenhagen. The tour guide was keen to point out Greenland’s flag to us. Fast forward to January 2025: President-elect Donald J. Trump wants to acquire this Danish territory.
In a news release announcing Ken Howery as his pick for U.S. Ambassador to Denmark, Trump expressed a desire to obtain Greenland, an autonomous territory, from our NATO ally. He wrote, “For purposes of National Security and Freedom throughout the World, the United States of America feels that the ownership and control of Greenland is an absolute necessity.” This week, at a press conference, Trump reiterated support for the acquisition and likely encouraged his son, Donald Trump Jr., to travel to Nuuk, its capital, to make the case.
It’s easy to dismiss this as trolling; I think it’s a smart play to assert ourselves in the Arctic. The WSJ Editorial Board even warmed up to the idea, writing, “A Greenland deal has potential if he’s [Trump’s] artful.”
This is not the first time President Trump, a real estate developer, has seriously entertained buying Greenland. In 2019, his administration explored the move quite seriously - citing national security concerns. It prompted a response from a defiant Greenland Ministry of Foreign Affairs that posted the following statement on its Twitter/X account: “Greenland is rich in valuable resources such as minerals, the purest water and ice, fish stocks, seafood, renewable energy and is a new frontier for adventure tourism. We're open for business, not for sale.”
Trump, believe it or not, isn’t the first president or elected U.S. official to propose buying Greenland. William Seward, the Secretary of State responsible for purchasing Alaska from Russia in 1867, commissioned a report in 1868 titled, “A Report on the Resources of Iceland and Greenland.”
“In considering the future of Greenland, we cannot confine ourselves entirely to materialistic considerations…If a country has in it the means of developing man in any way, physically or mentally, it may be said to be rich to that extent…,” the report explained, “Even if we had no hope of finding there a place for settlement or new roads to profit, there are still strong reasons why civilization should strive to reach and explore them. They possess, as it were, the key to many problems of science, and the answer to many questions which are at present discussed by geographers. Certainly, new truths are as precious acquisitions as new mines or new fishing grounds, and a country which has supplied them has enriched the world as much as one which sends us the means of indulging our tastes or satisfying our appetites."
Although Seward wanted to absorb Greenland, the acquisition ultimately never transpired. Could Trump, however, succeed here where he failed? Should we annex the fiercely independent Greenland, despite the ruling party being socialist? And if Trump can’t annex it, could the U.S. strategically insert itself more in the region? The latter is a more plausible and realistic scenario.
Bringing Greenland under American influence, and away from Russia and China, is vitally important.
Former Trump National Security Advisor Robert C. O’Brien made the case for annexation on Fox News last month, calling Greenland a “critical battleground of the future.” He added that the Arctic will be “a pathway that maybe even cuts down on the usage of the Panama Canal.”
Greenland is undoubtedly rich in rare earth elements (REE)—boasting 25 of 34critical minerals. China has a monopoly over REE by controlling 60% of the global supply and 85% of processing. Trump knows China has an outsized global influence over REE, which is why he’s making a play for the territory.
The autonomous territory also houses our Pituffik Space Base. Additionally, our nation currently enjoys defense cooperation and basing rights with Denmark under the Defense of Greenland Agreement to the “benefit of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO).” The DGA was officially signed on April 27, 1951. President-elect Trump, a master negotiator, could renegotiate the terms of DGA with the King of Denmark that are more amenable to U.S. interests in his second term.
In addition to its innumerable natural resources and strategic location, Greenland tourism is a burgeoning industry for American travelers. It offers world-class fly fishing excursions and prime Northern Lights viewing opportunities. In May 2025, United Airlines will launch a direct flight from Newark International to Nuuk. But a 2023 New York Times article warned, “Greenland Wants You to Visit. But Not All at Once.”
Greenland, were it to be annexed, won’t be Trump’s Folly. But annexation, barring some miracle, is unlikely to happen. But there are already agreements in place, like the DGA, that can be renegotiated. New deals about critical minerals could also be created.
Dismiss Trump’s Greenland gambit, annexation or not, at your own peril.
Post a Comment