Trump’s Greenland Gambit, Europe In A Fix – OpEd

January 22, 2026January 22, 2026 Dr. Jyoti Prasad Das 0 Comments

Denmark assumed full control over Greenland following the 1814 Treaty of Kiel. The US had plans to annex Greenland as early as the 1860s, when the US administration considered annexing Greenland and Iceland, but the idea lacked Congressional support at that time. In 1910, an informal territorial swap proposal was discussed between the US, Germany, and Denmark, which would have handed over Greenland to the US, Mindanao to Germany, and North Schleswig to Denmark but the plan was stillborn. In 1916, the US traded any interest it had in Greenland to Denmark as part of its compensation for the Danish West Indies, which are now the US Virgin Islands. During World War II, the US established military bases – like the one in Narsarsuaq as a vital stopover for aircraft flying from North America to Europe – in Greenland and after the war; it offered to purchase the island from Denmark.

The 1951 defense agreement between the US and Denmark paved the way for the Thule airbase, now known as Pituffik space base – part of NORADs missile and space tracking system – and the legendary ‘Camp Century’ built under ‘Project Iceworm’ to store nuclear missiles in silos hidden in tunnels running into hundreds of kilometers reaching close to Soviet territory. By 1964, melting ice was threatening to expose those secret tunnels, forcing its abandonment. In 2024, a NASA team while flying over northwestern Greenland and testing a new radar system to map glacial sheets re-discovered the base which was kept classified till 1997. Earlier, in 1968, a US B-52 bomber crashed near Thule, carrying 4 thermonuclear bombs on a ‘Chrome Dome’ alert mission over the Baffin Bay. This shows that Greenland has long been part of America’s nuclear strategy. US plans regarding Greenland therefore have deep historical roots, and Washington will continue to systematically advance its strategic interests in the polar region.

Greenland spans an area of about 21.7 lakh sq kms. India’s area is roughly 32.9 lakh square kms. So, Greenland is two-thirds the size of India. It is bigger than India’s 10 largest states combined, but with a population of just 56,000 people. It is also the largest island in the world. In 1979, Greenlanders voted in favor of autonomy from Denmark in a referendum on ’Home Rule,’ and in 2009, they secured the right to self-determination through the “Self-Government Act” making Greenlandic the official language, but there was a rising pro-independence sentiment. This created a window of opportunity for the US. Trump saw Denmark having a tenuous hold over Greenland and China was moving in. Greenland may not reject to strike a bargain with the US directly. If the US pays Denmark, it looks colonial. If the US pays Greenlanders directly, each citizen becomes a multi-millionaire overnight as the offer could go up to $700 billion according to 3 people familiar with the price tag. And this is not new for America with a history of purchasing Louisiana from France, taking over Texas and California from Mexico through the Treaty of Guadalupe, and acquiring Alaska from Russia. Alaska was neglected then; today it is priceless. Trump sees Greenland as the next Alaska. Moreover, the distance from Washington to Nuuk is less than Nuuk to Copenhagen. So, the US sees Greenland as a direct security zone. Denmark is farther away; the US is nearby.

Greenland is strategically vital. It sits at the crossroads of North America, Europe, and the Arctic, dominating key air routes, North Atlantic sea lanes, and Arctic Ocean access. Melting ice is opening up shorter Asia-Europe shipping lanes bypassing the Suez Canal, boosting the island’s economic and military profile. Greenland hosts missile early warning systems and anchors the GIUK (Greenland-Iceland-UK) Gap, a critical chokepoint for Russian naval movements. As for the sea routes across the ocean, the eastern route called the Northern Sea Route is under Russian oversight and the Chinese will pass through it at will with the Kremlin’s nod. Trump can do nothing about it. The Western route called the Northwest Passage remains under Canada’s control, and the US is by the Bering Strait that connects both of them – the NSR and the NWP – to the Pacific Ocean. The US push for full control of Greenland – beyond its formal military presence facilitated by the 1951 defense agreement – centers on 4 interconnected strategic imperatives that have reached critical urgency from the evolving great power competition with Russia and China which are; missile defense dominance, countering Russian militarization of the melting Arctic sea routes, blocking Chinese strategic inroads, and securing emerging trade routes and mineral resources.

Minerals are the hidden gold. Greenland has 25 out of 34 critical raw materials in the EU critical minerals list that are needed for defense systems, EV batteries, chips, and other cutting edge technologies. It also has considerable oil & gas reserves. Rare earths are crucial for military technologies. This is the economic core of Trump’s security argument. Earlier, ice made mining impossible. Now, melting ice is giving easier access to these resources, and at lower costs in extracting them. Greenland hosts 2 of the largest known rare earth deposits, at Kvanefjeld and Tanbreez. China’s Shenghe Resources is the second largest share-holder in the Kvanefjeld project and New York based Critical Metals Corp (CRML) is actively developing the Tanbreez project. CRML stocks are rising since the beginning of this year, benefitting from the convergence of upbeat drilling results and a supportive macro narrative.

The arrival of China – calling itself a “near-Arctic state” – and the growing Sino-Russian nexus have renewed American military interest in Greenland, first articulated by the then Secretary of State, Mike Pompeo, in 2019, and now by Trump himself as he threatens to unleash tariffs on EU nations. Trump frames Greenland as a national security issue that justifies tariff pressure even on NATO allies. US military planners increasingly see Greenland as a bulwark against Sino-Russian entrenchment in the Arctic. China is already a part owner in a Greenland mining company and is trying to develop Arctic trade routes which Beijing calls the ‘Polar Silk Road’ for faster trade with Europe. China is immensely interested in Greenland’s critical raw materials, particularly rare earths and uranium, and has also explored access to ports, airports, and logistics hubs that could support resource extraction but political and regulatory decisions in Greenland and Denmark have thwarted China’s foray. Russia is America’s Arctic neighbor with a robust military footprint. The NSR is primarily a trade route connecting Europe, being developed by Moscow and backed by the Chinese who want to integrate it with the PSR as part of their BRI network.

The geo-strategy of Russia and China entails the development of dual-use facilities along Russia’s Arctic coast. However, there is no verified evidence of Russian or Chinese naval forces encircling Greenland. Nordic states citing NATO intelligence have publicly refuted such reports despite an uptick in Russian submarine activity around the GIUK gap. China’s Arctic presence is growing through economic, scientific, and institutional engagement with Russia. But the Sino-Russian presence in the Arctic does not justify the trampling of sovereign rights of a democratic country and its right to self-determination – basic values the US has championed since the WW II. Greenland remains part of the kingdom of Denmark under a self-rule arrangement that recognizes Greenlanders as a people with the right to self-determination. That arrangement was made for Greenland’s autonomy, or independence; not for the transfer to the US either by acquisition or through coercion. Any attempted takeover without Danish consent would be in contravention of the UN charter upholding the principle of sovereignty and non-interference in domestic jurisdiction.

Trump insists on taking over Greenland for national security interests as the US embarks on developing its ‘Golden Dome’ project. However, the US already enjoys extensive security advantages under long-term defense mechanisms with Denmark being a NATO ally. Europe is firm on sovereignty being non-negotiable; which cannot be traded or forcefully acquired. A forced takeover would strain transatlantic relations or even implode NATO much to the delight of Russia and China. Allies who once followed Washington’s leads would begin to see it as a foe rather than a friend. Apart from fracturing the NATO bloc, Trump’s actions could drive Europe toward China (France is urging for bigger Chinese investments, while the UK has just approved China’s super embassy in London) and legitimize Russian and Chinese territorial revisionism in Ukraine and Taiwan respectively. The US will have to brace for combined economic retaliation from the EU. The US has a string of military bases spread across Europe not merely to protect Europe, but for power projection primarily toward Russia. For US security, Europe matters far more than Greenland.

If tariffs are imposed, it becomes a precedent setting clash where trade tools are used to pursue territorial and security objectives even with allies. This would be a turning point in transatlantic relations and one with consequences far beyond Greenland. Treating territory as commodity to be acquired or seized, undermines the very ‘rules based order’ the US claims to defend. The repercussions of a forced takeover would be profound. If Washington believes that the strategic importance of Greenland is increasing, it can reinforce its presence without any hassle through NATO mechanisms to jointly address the security challenges in the region with Denmark, Greenland, and the other Nordic allies. There are off-ramps available to the US if it chooses to opt for: joint monitoring of Chinese investments in Greenland, beefing-up defenses with more US troops, arms, and surveillance. But if Trump continues with his muscle-flexing, he will wreck an already frayed relationship with Europe.