Donald Trump has once again reignited controversy by floating the idea that Greenland could slip into the hands of China or Russia unless the United States steps in. Speaking to reporters, Trump framed the massive Arctic island as a critical strategic prize and warned that Washington cannot afford to stay on the sidelines.
According to Trump, Greenland’s location makes it far too important to be left under current arrangements. He argued that if the U.S. does not assert control, rival powers will inevitably move in. In his words, America must act to prevent Russia or China from gaining influence there, presenting the issue as a matter of national security rather than diplomacy.
During a meeting with oil and gas executives at the White House, Trump doubled down on this position. He bluntly claimed that the United States would end up with Greenland “one way or the other,” suggesting that a negotiated deal would be preferable, but making it clear he believes Washington should proceed regardless of whether others agree. The tone marked a noticeable escalation from his earlier remarks.
These comments echo Trump’s widely mocked 2019 proposal to purchase Greenland from Denmark. However, now that he is serving a second term, his language has grown sharper and more aggressive. He has repeatedly implied that the Arctic territory could be taken by force if necessary, a stance that has alarmed U.S. allies.
Trump has also criticized existing defense arrangements, despite the long-standing agreement that allows the U.S. to operate the Pituffik Space Base in Greenland. In his view, leasing military facilities is not enough. He has argued that only outright ownership guarantees lasting security, claiming that leases leave the door open for hostile powers to gain a foothold over time.
“You defend ownership, not leases,” Trump has said on multiple occasions, warning that without direct U.S. control, adversaries could infiltrate the region and pose a serious threat. This rhetoric has been interpreted by many as an implicit threat to use force, further straining relations with Denmark.
Denmark’s Prime Minister, Mette Frederiksen, has described the situation as a serious and defining challenge for her country. Acknowledging the gravity of Trump’s statements, she said there is now an open conflict over Greenland and stressed that the moment has far-reaching consequences beyond the island itself.
Frederiksen later reinforced her position on social media, emphasizing Denmark’s commitment to international law and the right of people to decide their own future. She made clear that Greenland’s status cannot be dictated by outside pressure or power politics.
Other European leaders quickly voiced support for Denmark. Sweden’s Prime Minister, Ulf Kristersson, criticized what he called threatening rhetoric from Washington after Trump repeated his claim that the U.S. would act on Greenland “whether they like it or not.” Kristersson warned that such language undermines international norms.
Speaking at a defense conference in Sweden, Kristersson said Nordic and Baltic countries, along with several major European states, stand firmly with Denmark. He cautioned that a U.S. takeover of Greenland would violate international law and could set a dangerous precedent for other countries to seize territory by force.
Germany also stepped in to back Denmark. German Foreign Minister Johann Wadephul traveled to Iceland for talks focused on Arctic security, underscoring how seriously European governments are taking the issue. German officials stressed that security in the Arctic is a shared NATO concern, not something to be resolved unilaterally.
Wadephul acknowledged that if the U.S. has concerns about Russian or Chinese activity in the region, those concerns should be addressed collectively within NATO. At the same time, he was clear that Greenland’s future must be decided by the people of Greenland and Denmark, not imposed by an outside power.
Germany has indicated it is prepared to take on greater responsibility within NATO in the Arctic. Finance Minister Lars Klingbeil summed up Berlin’s position by saying allies should strengthen security together, not against one another.
Several European leaders, including those from France, Britain, Germany, and Italy, have gone even further by signing a joint letter stating that decisions about Greenland’s future belong solely to Denmark and Greenland themselves.
NATO’s Supreme Allied Commander, General Alexus Grynkewich, has confirmed that Greenland is being actively discussed within the alliance. While he said there is no immediate threat to NATO territory, he acknowledged that the Arctic’s strategic importance is growing rapidly.
Grynkewich avoided commenting on the political tone of Trump’s remarks but noted that discussions among NATO members are ongoing and constructive. He also pointed out that recent joint operations by Russian and Chinese naval forces near the Arctic highlight why the region is drawing increased attention.
Adding an unexpected twist, Russian President Vladimir Putin has previously appeared to agree with Trump’s assessment of Greenland’s strategic value. In remarks reported by Russian state media, Putin said global competition in the Arctic is intensifying and suggested that U.S. plans regarding Greenland should be taken seriously.
Putin noted that American interest in Greenland is not new, pointing to historical attempts by the U.S. to acquire the territory. He cited early 20th-century discussions and agreements that ultimately failed, arguing that today’s debate is rooted in long-standing ambitions rather than offhand comments.
Taken together, Trump’s renewed push on Greenland has unsettled allies, strengthened European unity around Denmark, and raised uncomfortable questions about respect for international law. Rather than reinforcing Western cooperation, his approach risks weakening trust within NATO and handing rhetorical ammunition to rivals like Russia, all while ignoring the most important voices of all: the people of Greenland themselves.
Comments
Post a Comment