It’s been a busy few weeks for the state department. Maduro has been captured. Protests in Tehran signal the current Iranian regime is coming to an end. Cuba is now in crisis after being denied access to Venezuelan oil. And in the midst of all these serious international issues, the President seems to have created another. Seemingly out of the blue, Trump has insisted that it’s “unacceptable” for the U.S. to not control Greenland, citing the need to secure the country’s supply of rare earths and interests of China and Russia in the region.
Greenland is a Danish autonomous province and a member of NATO, meaning seizing the country by force would mean attacking an ally. Despite this Republican Representative Randy Fine of Florida has introduced legislation that would give the President significant leeway to “annex or acquire Greenland,” to make it the 51st state. So what is the likelihood that we really buy or steal Greenland from Denmark? And is it really necessary for national security?
On its face, Trump’s concerns for the region seem well-founded. Former Dutch Admiral and former chair of the NATO military committee, Rob Bauer believes rising tensions come as a result of once frozen waters becoming “navigable” due to global warming. Bauer says this means both “merchant” as well as “naval” Chinese vessels’ quickest route to the North Atlantic, i.e. to America and Europe, would be through the waters past Greenland. He further added that with China aiding Russia’s war effort in Ukraine, Putin has allowed Chinese ships to pass through its waters, which was unheard of mere years ago. Making security concerns valid.
The other aspect fueling Trump’s interest is unmined rare earths. Greenlanders have blocked attempts to extract these minerals over safety concerns, as they are often mixed with radioactive Uranium. Despite this history, China is still attempting to get at them, through an Australian Company called Energy Transition Minerals, substantiating Trump’s claims that China is making moves in the region. In addition Greenland has an estimated ‘30 billion barrels in oil and natural gas’, possibly rivaling U.S. oil reserves, another resource that remains unutilized. Greenland is not just important for geographical reasons, but its relatively untapped economic potential.
On paper, Greenland seems like the greatest real estate investment ever, if you totally ignore the fact that people live there, and it’s already owned by another whole country that doesn’t want to sell. Greenland’s prime minister, Jens-Frederik Nielsen, has defiantly stated that “If we have to choose between the USA and Denmark here and now, we choose Denmark. We choose NATO, the Kingdom of Denmark and the EU.” Though notably he said so standing right next to the Danish prime minister. Greenland’s opposition party has called for negotiations with the U.S. outside the watchful eye of Denmark, so it’s clear there is at least some split on the issue, but it’s less of a desire to join the U.S. or remain with Denmark, and more of an Independence or Denmark disagreement.
This is borne out in a recent poll that found 85% of Greenlanders do not want U.S. control and 54% desire independence from Denmark. Either way it doesn’t seem like Trump is dealing with a populace that wants to become Americans.
Trump cannot buy Greenland from Denmark, because while it may not be independent, it is autonomous meaning it governs itself, making certain decisions without input from the Danish government. In American terms, it would be like selling Puerto Rico to Cuba without their consent. This leaves Trump with one option, military takeover. Olafur Grimsson, former President of Greenland’s neighbor Iceland, and Chairman of the Arctic Circle, an annual meeting discussing regional issues, has warned such a move would cause “…fallout…on a scale that we have never seen in living memory.” This fallout would not just be between Greenland and the U.S. but with NATO and the EU.
In fact the damage Trump has done to foreign relations with moves such as this might already be done, less than 1 in 5 Europeans, and 1 in 4 Britons, found the U.S. to still be an ally. A military takeover would mean furthering rifts with our allies, and risking America’s partnership with NATO.
To most Americans acquiring Greenland seems like an outlandish idea. Most of us probably can’t find it on a map and it has a population smaller than Kalamazoo, Michigan. So we may be a bit blind to its strategic and material value. For these reasons and the understandable concerns most people have over invading another sovereign country, 75% of Americans disapprove of Trump’s proposed idea. It is a good thing then that Trump doesn’t have to invade Greenland to achieve any of his goals. Excavation of mineral rights can be secured through American companies, just as China is trying to do, and joint NATO exercises in the region can strengthen our relationship with European allies while addressing security concerns.
However his aggression towards Greenland, seems to be part of a broader “Donroe Doctrine,” an attempt to take a more aggressive stance in not just the western hemisphere (the Monroe Doctrine) but throughout the world. As Trump’s overthrow of Maduro, eagerness to send troops to Mexico, and more recently his desire to bomb Iran, halted by none other than Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, famous for his reluctance to bomb and love of Iran, have all shown us, Trump now more than ever is using the most aggressive options he has.
So while Greenland doesn’t want to be acquired, and Americans don’t want to acquire Greenland, our arctic ally faces an uncertain future.
