Arctic Flashpoint: Trump’s Greenland Ambitions and the Battle for Sovereignty and Security
Alex Blackburn | 21 January 2025
Summary
Trump’s renewed focus on Greenland highlights its strategic Arctic position and resources, fueling tensions over potential US ambitions.
Denmark and Greenland reject US pressure, balancing sovereignty with economic dependence and independence aspirations.
US actions risk NATO unity and EU collective sovereignty, spurring calls for stronger Arctic defence and unified European policies.
The geopolitical tension surrounding Greenland has resurfaced with Donald Trump's re-election as President of the United States. During his previous term, Trump proposed purchasing Greenland, a semiautonomous territory of Denmark, which was met with global scepticism and Danish rejection. This time, however, Trump has escalated his rhetoric, refusing to rule out military or economic coercion to acquire the island, citing its strategic importance for US national security.
Greenland, the world’s largest island, occupies a pivotal position in the Arctic, straddling the Atlantic and Arctic oceans. Its location makes it crucial for controlling the Greenland-Iceland-UK (GIUK) gap, a vital passage for NATO’s defence strategy against Russian naval forces. Moreover, the island is rich in natural resources such as rare earth minerals, uranium, oil and natural gas, which are increasingly significant as global supply chains shift away from reliance on China. The remarks have triggered strong reactions from Denmark, Greenland and other NATO and EU allies, who view them as a direct challenge to sovereignty and international law.'
Implications for Denmark and Greenland
Denmark has found itself uncomfortable, balancing its role as Greenland’s overseer with its obligations as a US ally, with Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen reaffirming that “Greenland is not for sale” and emphasised that the Greenlandic people decide its future. Greenland’s Prime Minister, Múte Egede, has echoed these sentiments, reiterating the island’s growing inclination toward independence from Denmark rather than integration into the US However, Greenland’s economic dependence on Denmark - with subsidies accounting for 60% of its economy - complicates its push for full sovereignty.
The historical context further complicates matters. Denmark’s colonial legacy in Greenland, including controversial policies such as the forced relocation of Inuit children in the 1950s, continues to fuel nationalist sentiment on the island. Younger generations increasingly embrace their Inuit heritage and advocate for independence, making the Greenland question a delicate issue for Copenhagen.
Implications for NATO and the EU
Trump’s assertive stance on Greenland has significant implications for NATO and the European Union - the GIUK gap, which Greenland anchors, is critical for NATO’s defence strategy. During the Cold War, the US and other NATO allies stationed substantial naval forces in the region to counter Russian threats. Today, the gap remains a key strategic choke point, and any disruption in its control could weaken NATO’s ability to project power in the North Atlantic. Both the UK and Denmark have collaborated under NATO’s Arctic Policy Framework to enhance military capabilities in the region. However, if Greenland were to come under US control, this collaboration could be jeopardised, potentially altering the balance of power within NATO - US unilateralism in Greenland could undermine NATO’s collective defence principles, forcing European allies to reassess their Arctic strategies.
The EU, meanwhile, views Trump’s rhetoric as a direct challenge to the principles of sovereignty and border inviolability. French Foreign Minister Jean-Noël Barrot has stated that the EU would not allow other nations to “attack its sovereign borders”, while German Chancellor Olaf Scholz has emphasised that borders must not be redrawn by force. Such comments reflect the EU’s deep concern about the precedent US actions could set for other territorial disputes worldwide.
Additionally, Trump’s threat to impose high tariffs on Danish goods if Denmark resists US claims over Greenland has sent shockwaves through the European trade sector. A Danish Industry study predicts that a 10% tariff on EU imports to the US could shrink Denmark’s GDP by three percentage points, with retaliatory measures from the EU further exacerbating the economic fallout. The prospect of a trade war has heightened tensions within the EU as member states grapple with the broader implications of Trump’s protectionist policies.
As Trump’s inauguration approaches, Denmark and Greenland are bracing for potential upheaval. Danish leaders have held emergency meetings to formulate a response, while Greenland’s government has sought assurances from Copenhagen about its future. Yet, there remains hope that Trump’s attention may soon shift to other issues, temporarily defusing the crisis.
For NATO, the situation underscores the need to strengthen Arctic defence capabilities and reaffirm collective security commitments. The alliance may need to reallocate resources to the GIUK gap and develop contingency plans to address potential disruptions caused by US unilateral actions. European NATO members, in particular, could push for greater autonomy in Arctic defence to mitigate their reliance on the US.
The EU faces its own set of challenges. Trump’s actions have highlighted the bloc’s vulnerability to external pressures and underscored the importance of a unified foreign policy. The EU may seek to enhance its Arctic presence, possibly through increased investment in Greenland and stronger partnerships with Arctic nations. Such measures could help counterbalance US influence and safeguard European interests in the region.
The road ahead for Greenland is fraught with uncertainty. While independence remains a long-term goal, the island must navigate a complex web of economic, political, and security considerations. Aligning too closely with the US could compromise its autonomy, while continued reliance on Denmark poses challenges. A possible solution could be a Commonwealth-style arrangement that preserves Greenland’s ties to Denmark while granting greater self-determination.
In the broader geopolitical context, Trump’s Greenland ambitions reflect a shift toward a more transactional approach to international relations. The US risks alienating allies and undermining the rules-based global order by prioritising economic security and strategic dominance. As French Foreign Minister Barrot aptly noted, the world may be entering an era where “survival of the fittest” prevails, challenging established norms and institutions.
The standoff over Greenland has exposed deep divisions within the transatlantic alliance and raised fundamental questions about sovereignty, security, and international law. For Denmark and Greenland, the crisis underscores the delicate balance between autonomy and alliance. It highlights the need for more vigorous collective defence and a more unified approach to Arctic policy for NATO and the EU. As the world grapples with the implications of Trump’s second term, the Greenland question serves as a stark reminder of the challenges facing the global order in an era of shifting power dynamics.
Forecast
Short-term
Trump may lose focus on his overall goal of annexing Greenland. His previous term as president has proven that he is known for shifty policy with sudden changes. A more realistic short-term compromise between the US and Denmark would be a negotiated increase of US personnel on the island, guaranteeing American and Danish security.
Long-term
If the Greenland issue persists during a Trump presidency, it could prove a serious test for the NATO alliance. In response to Trump’s ambitions, the French President has already expressed a desire for a more Eurocentric and coordinated military policy between the UK, France, and Germany, anticipating a rift between the US and European NATO member states.