Quick Take
In 2019, Trump announced that he wanted to buy Greenland. This was generally dismissed as bizarre grandstanding and, at the time, provided Greenland with a vehicle to announce to the world that it “was open for business, but not for sale.”
Four years later, the President and his real estate aspirations for the Arctic are back. Is he serious? Would he do it? These are the questions being floated in the media. Somehow we have rapidly moved from how inappropriate this proposition is to examining its feasibility and likelihood.
Should we not be asking what the future holds if Trump is serious?
The United States will not be made safer by dominating its neighbours. Security in the Arctic will not be achieved through acts of aggression against U.S. allies. Global stability will not be sustained if the rules-based order becomes optional.
Greenland, Panama, Canada…who is next?
If Trump uses force or the threat of force to try to seize Greenland, it may be hoped that so evident a “high crime and misdemeanor” will impel the needed numbers of Republican members of Congress to join their Democratic colleagues in impeaching and convicting him.
Trump's interest in Greenland is linked to his, and the United States’, increased interest in the Arctic. During Trump's first term, climate concerns and cooperation in the North were downplayed. Instead, the Trump administration used the Arctic to highlight how Russian and Chinese expansionism had to be stopped. In particular, China's growing interest in the Arctic has led to a new and more forward-leaning U.S. Arctic security policy.
Historically, despite being a superpower, the U.S. presence and capabilities in its part of the Arctic – northern Alaska – have not been prioritized. The historic lack of investment and commitment means that the American Arctic is an area where Trump can easily score points. Being seen as decisive and putting American interests first ("America First") – despite concerns in Copenhagen – plays into this.
The interest in Arctic affairs and concerns over great power rivalry did not change with Biden as President, although the tone and rhetoric became more nuanced and subtle.
Still, last summer, the Pentagon presented a new security strategy for the Arctic in response to the changing geopolitical situation after Russian full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022. The first country discussed is not Russia, however, which is undoubtedly the primary Arctic security threat in the North, but China – a non-Arctic state.
Trump’s renewed ambition to acquire Greenland without ruling out military action is deeply dismaying. First of all, Greenland is not for sale. Secondly, the United States does not need to buy or use military action to cooperate with Greenland. Greenland is a close ally to the United States as well as a NATO member. The United States already have an operating military base in Greenland (Thule Air Base).
There is an overlap of security and economics in the United States’ interests in Greenland, as the island has an abundance of Rare Earth Elements (REE) and other natural resources. This is crucial in the coming decades and increased competition with China, as the REE are vital to modern technology. While the President Elect’s comments highlight how the Arctic region’s importance is rapidly growing, threatening a NATO ally is hopefully only a negotiation tactic. As the Prime Minister of Greenland has stated, Greenland is open for business, but it is not for sale.