The Telegraph – Denmark cannot defend the territory. It is too strategically important for the US to leave it vulnerable to potential Chinese control.
“SOON,” posted Katie Miller, wife of White House deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller, in a post on X featuring a map of Greenland overlaid with the colours of the American flag. Her post was enough to drive Donald Trump’s European antagonists and the international Left into a hysterical temper tantrum. Coming on the heels of the spectacularly successful US operation to arrest Nicolás Maduro, it restarted the debate about the future of Greenland, a semi-autonomous Danish territory that Donald Trump has long coveted.
The commentariat has denounced Mr Trump’s interest in the island, alleging prospective violations of international law, the UN Charter, good manners, and basic decency. Mette Frederiksen, the Danish prime minister, grimly predicted that, if the US took military action to seize the territory, which Trump has not ruled out, then “everything stops… including our Nato and thus the security that has been provided since the end of the Second World War”. A group of Nato leaders issued a statement that “Greenland belongs to its people” and that only Greenland and Denmark can decide its future, while nevertheless conceding that the US is “an essential partner” in Arctic security.
It appears that some of the European reaction has been over-hasty: Marco Rubio, the secretary of state, is reported to have told members of Congress on Monday that Mr Trump’s goal was to purchase the island, not to invade it. But his interest in the territory is undeniable: “We need Greenland from the standpoint of national security”, Mr Trump told reporters at the weekend. And a dispassionate analysis of the question would conclude that the case for American possession is overwhelming.
Greenland looms large in strategic thinking. Its remote Arctic location and small population belie its commanding position over Atlantic shipping routes, its vast mineral wealth, and, sadly, modern Denmark’s inability to defend it.
Securing Atlantic trade routes has been an American priority since the Civil War, which preceded the first notions of American acquisition of Danish colonial territories in 1867. They culminated in the purchase of Denmark’s Virgin Islands during the First World War, mainly to keep them from falling into German hands. In the next war, Germany’s defeat of Denmark in just 12 hours on April 9, 1940, left Greenland vulnerable to Hitler’s military reach, so the Danish envoy concluded an agreement for a US military presence that has endured ever since. In the Cold War, Greenland formed an essential part of the radar warning networks against Soviet missile attack, which was anticipated over shorter polar routes. Today, as China has preposterously declared itself a “near-Arctic state” and pursues an ambitious “polar silk road” across Russia’s underdeveloped Arctic ports, its inroads and investments could give it control absent American action.
Greenland’s mineral wealth is also at play in a dangerous game. The island is a potential rare earths superpower, with some 1.5 million metric tonnes estimated to lie under its defrosting surface. The entire United States, by comparison, has only slightly larger deposits, at around 1.8 million tonnes. China might dominate the global market with about 44 million, holding nearly half the world’s estimated reserves, but Greenland is still an important alternative source for western economies, and preventing it from falling under Beijing’s sway is thus a major strategic imperative for the US.
Can Denmark not defend Greenland on its own, or within Nato? Fat chance. Even the country’s recently augmented defence budget languishes at under $10bn (£7.4bn) per annum, compared to the $1trn (£744bn) US military budget Mr Trump has requested for 2026. The Danish armed forces have fewer personnel than New York City’s police department. Copenhagen’s investment in its island possession is impecunious, building on a long and unfortunate colonial legacy of neglect.
When Trump returned to office in 2025, Denmark’s defensive force for Greenland consisted of one observation plane, four customs inspection vessels, and several dogsled teams. After Trump first mentioned acquiring Greenland, the Danes pledged an additional inspection vessel and more dogs. Left to Denmark, Greenland’s security is doubtful. With America in charge, it is assured.
Exactly when and how Greenland would become American is a future unknown. But there are already signs. A US mission led by JD Vance visited the island in March 2025. A direct flight service connecting Nuuk, Greenland’s capital, to the mainland US opened in June.
Despite the Danish government’s rhetoric warning against military action, it has said that it is open to the US expanding its military role in Greenland. In December, the US-Greenland Joint Committee formed in 2004 with US, Danish, and local representatives, issued a statement anticipating strengthened ties. Just before the new year, Trump named Louisiana’s Republican governor Jeff Landry his special envoy to Greenland, suggesting that the US will seek to deal with the local government directly.
Greenland’s status as a Danish territory allows it to achieve independence by a simple majority vote of its population. This is the eventual goal of the political party that governs Greenland, members of which presumably understand that independence will almost certainly result in some form of American hegemony.
Perhaps the best solution, which I have previously advocated for, would be uniquely American – a Compact of Free Association, the diplomatic arrangement that governs US relations with the Marshall Islands, Micronesia, and Palau. Under its terms, those Pacific island nations retain independence and self-government while the US enjoys unlimited military access in exchange for free trade. Under a similar agreement, Greenland’s democracy and prosperity would be assured while US and global security concerns would be answered.
On Monday, the Economist reported that talk of such a solution is spreading in Washington, perhaps as part of a deal the Trump administration is preparing to offer the island nation. In any event, the inevitability of the US controlling Greenland seems to be inseparable from making America great again.