For more than a century, the United States has expressed its interest in Greenland, the largest island in the world, which holds a strategic geopolitical position and abundant natural resources.
However, in recent years, this interest has been fueled by Donald Trump, who on several occasions has proposed the idea of buying the autonomous territory of Denmark.
Why does Trump want to buy Greenland?
Trump's interest in Greenland is not a mere whim or an unfounded provocation.
His insistence on the purchase of the island is due to a combination of strategic, economic, and geopolitical factors ranging from access to natural resources to dominance in the Arctic in the context of global competition with powers like China and Russia.
During his first term in 2019, Trump surprised the international community by suggesting that the United States buy Greenland.
Although his proposal was initially seen as an eccentricity, there is a logic behind it that is deeply rooted in the doctrine of American expansion and national security.
Greenland holds critical importance due to its location, its wealth of minerals, and its potential for the economic and military future of the United States.
Trump believes that owning Greenland is "an absolute necessity" for the country's economic security.
He has even suggested that he might resort to economic or military pressure to acquire it: "No, I cannot guarantee it in any case, but I can say this: we need them for economic security."
Strategic and geopolitical reasons
Greenland is key to the security of the United States, as it is home to the Pituffik Space Base, an advanced outpost in the Arctic that is essential for defense and monitoring potential attacks from Russia.
Furthermore, its location between Europe and North America gives it a crucial role in controlling maritime routes and NATO's defense.
Washington's interest in Greenland is not recent.
In 1867, President Andrew Johnson considered the purchase of the island following the acquisition of Alaska. Later, in 1946, the Harry Truman administration offered 100 million dollars to Denmark for the territory, but the proposal was rejected.
However, in 1951, the United States managed to establish its military presence on the island through a defense treaty with Denmark, which allowed for the maintenance of its base in the Arctic.
For Trump, securing Greenland would mean strengthening American power in the Arctic region, an area that has gained geopolitical significance in recent years due to melting ice and the dispute over new trade routes and natural resources.
Currently, China and Russia have increased their presence in the region, which has raised concerns in Washington.
The natural resources of Greenland
One of the most sought-after factors in Greenland is its natural resources, which include oil, gas, and, above all, rare earth metals, essential for the electronics and defense industries.
Currently, China dominates the global production of these minerals and has threatened to restrict its exports, which has heightened concerns for Trump and his team.
Climate change has also heightened interest in the island.
The accelerated loss of ice has facilitated access to these resources and opened new maritime routes, which could benefit commercial exploitation.
Between 1985 and 2022, the Greenland ice sheet has decreased by 5,091 square kilometers, according to a study published in Nature.
Some experts believe that Trump and his circle see Greenland as an opportunity to reduce U.S. dependence on China for obtaining rare earth materials.
If the United States were to gain control of these reserves, it could strengthen its technology and defense industries, reducing China's influence in the global market.
The path to independence and the political implications
Since gaining autonomy in 1979, Greenland has made strides toward greater independence from Denmark. Its current Prime Minister, Múte B. Egede, is a member of the independence party Inuit Ataqatigiit (IA), which has rejected mining projects such as that of Kuannersuit, which would have turned the island into the largest Western producer of rare earth elements.
Nonetheless, Greenland relies on an annual subsidy from Denmark of approximately 540 million euros.
This economic dependency is an obstacle to their total independence. In this context, questions arise about whether Trump could offer an agreement similar to that of the Marshall Islands, where the United States provides financial support in exchange for certain strategic privileges.
The general elections scheduled for April or May 2025 could determine the political future of Greenland.
The population of the island faces the dilemma of continuing to depend on Denmark or seeking independence through economic agreements that could involve the United States.
Resistance of Denmark and Greenland
Despite Trump's efforts, both Denmark and Greenland have rejected any possibility of a sale.
Prime Minister Frederiksen has reiterated that Denmark is not authorized to sell Greenland, as any decision about its future depends on the Greenlanders.
For his part, Egede has made it clear: "We are not for sale and we never will be."
However, the increasing U.S. pressure could create tensions in the region. Recently, Denmark announced a €1.34 billion increase in military spending to strengthen the defense of Greenland.
In addition, the Danish royal family has strengthened its symbol of unity with the island by highlighting the figure of the polar bear on its coat of arms.
Could the purchase of Greenland occur?
Despite the historical background and the strategic and commercial interests of the United States, the acquisition of Greenland seems unlikely.
The Greenlanders have expressed their desire to move towards independence, but not through a sale to the United States.
Denmark's economic dependency remains an obstacle, although the prospect of a deal with the U.S. could open a new chapter in the island's history.
Trump's interest in Greenland not only reflects a geopolitical strategy but also an attempt to consolidate the economic and military power of the United States in the Arctic.
However, the resistance from Denmark and Greenland, along with the growing concern over the environmental impact of intensive resource exploitation, makes the sale of the island an unlikely scenario for now.
Filed under:
