Trump has misunderstood the Importance of Greenland
US Vice President J.D. Vance and Second Lady Usha Vance in Greenland on March 28, 2025. Photo: X / Vice President JD Vance
Greenland is neither more valuable nor more strategically important than other areas in the Arctic. And the Greenlandic people have rejected the United States. Yet US leaders continue with their provocative Greenland statements, most aptly showcased with J.D. Vance’s statements at Pituffik Space base. Why?
Broadly speaking, this is about increased US interest in everything that happens in the Arctic mixed with a desire to show strength at home. But continuing to put pressure on Denmark to “get” Greenland would be a grave mistake by the United States.
Trump’s interest in the Arctic
Interest in all things “Arctic”, from geopolitics to resource management, has been on the agenda for a decade now. American media outlets such as CNN, NBC and FOX News regularly produce extensive reports on the exciting things happening in the so-called “melting ice sheet”. Minerals, shipping, petroleum: everything is going to happen in the North. Russia is described as the dominant player, while China is perceived as a growing threat.
It is a seductive idea that there is a large island full of resources right next to the United States, inhabited by as many people as there are people at a traffic light in New York, where the “owners” (Kingdom of Denmark) have not looked after either the people or the resource potential. On top of that, one can throw in the pretext that the United States must control the island for its own security because China has shown interest there, while Russia is “only” 1,000 kilometers away as the crow flies.
However, it’s not as simple as Trump or the media would have you believe. The Arctic makes up 4% of the Earth’s surface. The Arctic Ocean, which makes up about half of the Arctic, is six times larger than the Mediterranean Sea. It’s easy to get lost – both physically and metaphorically – in this vast expanse of ocean and land.
Misunderstood Greenland’s importance
Do you want to take the shortcut between Europe and Asia via the Arctic Ocean? Greenland is far from the route you are using. Kirkenes, on the other hand, is centrally located. Do you want to extract oil, gas, or minerals? Some mining projects in Greenland may be attractive, but there are other places where it is easier and cheaper to extract resources.
The idea of Greenland as a “treasure chest” of mineral resources is both inaccurate and ignores that the Greenlandic population has often been critical of large-scale mining.
The argument we hear from the US about the security policy significance is also not up to snuff. There is no Chinese push into Greenland. And Greenland is not particularly strategically important for dealing with Russia in the north.
Both Alaska and Northern Norway are much more important in that context.
The Trump administration has also toyed with the idea of resuming economic cooperation with Russia in the Arctic, so it can hardly be overly concerned about Greenland’s proximity to Russia.
Greenland is therefore only a small, and not particularly central, part of the larger geopolitical picture in the Arctic.
It’s not really about Greenland
Despite the incompetence that the Signal scandal has exposed, we must still assume that Trump, Vice President Vance, and Secretary of State Rubio understand the nuances described here. So why, despite backlash from Denmark, the EU, and European countries, is the Trump administration continuing with its Greenland push?
The answer lies in America’s new foreign policy doctrine: America First. Not as a doctrine that considers what is in America’s long-term strategic interests. But as a doctrine that speaks to Trump’s voters and fan base.
They are unlikely to care about melting ice in the Arctic or relations with Denmark. However, they respond positively to the image of a strong leader who promotes American interests and puts European countries in their place.
In addition, it is clear that the Trump administration wants to put pressure on European countries to force a new normal where Europe takes responsibility for its own security and not only pays the price, but is grateful for US support. As Vice President Vance said in his meeting with Ukrainian President Zelensky in February: “You have to be thankful”.
The Greenland issue is also a perfect opportunity to divert attention from what the Trump administration is actually doing at home. Foreign policy statements, on everything from Ukraine to Gaza and Greenland, help to divert media attention from controversial domestic policy issues. The alternative is for the media to be filled with everything from the closure of departments to layoffs and cuts to welfare.
Annexation next?
What we all wonder is how far Trump is willing to go to pursue his desire to take control of Greenland. The backlash from the Greenlandic self-government, Denmark, and European allies seems to have had no effect. In fact, it may seem that it has become symbolically important for Trump to achieve a “deal” so that he can claim a victory on this issue.
It is unlikely that the United States would use military force to attempt to gain full control of Greenland. Such a move would violate fundamental principles and rights that the United States not only benefits from, but has been the global standard-bearer for.
An annexation would also completely destroy the foundation for cooperation between Europe and the United States. It would also likely create strong internal backlash from the American political system and the American military.
But it is unfortunately not unlikely that President Trump and Vice President Vance will continue to use other means of pressure, such as provocative statements, semi-official visits to Greenland, and economic measures. And the real winner in this drama is Russia, who gets exactly what they want: discord in the transatlantic relationship.
The question is whether Denmark and its allies will be able to halt this development and make it costly for the US to continue with the Greenland pressure. Here, European politicians must speak loudly and clearly. If the only thing Trump respects is power and big statements, we must do the same.