The mission of Issues in Perspective is to provide thoughtful, historical and biblically-centered perspectives on current ethical and cultural issues.

President Trump has repeatedly argued that America must assume control over Greenland—an interest that dates back to his first term.  His comments have been met with sharp pushback, with Greenland’s government rejecting a U.S. takeover under “any circumstances.” NATO allies have also warned that the use of U.S. military force to seize Greenland, which Trump initially threatened but has since ruled out, could put at risk the decades-old transatlantic alliance. Trump’s escalating rhetoric prompted Denmark to increase its military presence in and around Greenland, alongside several other European countries.

After weeks of escalating rhetoric about bringing Greenland under the control of the United States, U.S. President Donald Trump declared that he would seek a negotiated solution with European allies. In a social media post, Trump said that a meeting with NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte at the World Economic Forum in Davos had yielded “the framework of a future deal” regarding Greenland and the Arctic region, both of which Trump has argued are vital to U.S. national security interests. After the meeting with Rutte, Trump backed away from earlier threats to impose fresh tariffs on some European countries for opposing U.S. acquisition of the island, which is a semiautonomous territory of Denmark.

Dianna Roy of The Council on Foreign Relations, offers a superb historical overview of the situation about Greenland:

1. “Greenland has been considered a Danish territory for more than three hundred years, but it wasn’t until 1979 that Denmark granted the sparsely populated island home rule. In 2009, Denmark passed the Act on Greenland Self-Government, significantly expanding the island’s authority over its domestic affairs, including the police, courts, and coast guard. Denmark still maintains control over Greenland’s foreign affairs, defense policy, and monetary policy, providing an annual subsidy of approximately $600 million.  As part of Denmark, which is a founding member of NATO, Greenland is covered under the transatlantic alliance’s security guarantees. However, Greenland is not a member of the European Union (EU) or the European Single Market, despite being considered an overseas country and territory associated with the EU. Greenland’s roughly fifty-seven thousand citizens, the majority Indigenous Inuit, are EU citizens as well as Danish nationals. In recent years, Greenland has witnessed a growing independence movement. Under the self-government act, the island can gain independence via a referendum with approval from the Danish Parliament. In 2023, Greenland unveiled its first draft constitution, calling for the creation of a Greenlandic republic, independence from Denmark, and recognition of the island’s Inuit heritage. In March 2025, Greenland’s center-right Demokraatik party—which advocates for a gradual approach to independence—won the island’s parliamentary election, underscoring residents’ desire for greater sovereignty.”
2. Trump has repeatedly said that acquiring Greenland is critical to U.S. national security. Greenland’s location between Europe and North America and its proximity to the Arctic and North Atlantic Oceans makes it strategically important for military and defense purposes—particularly in monitoring increasing Chinese and Russian military activity in the region. While the United States already has a military base on Greenland, full control over the island could enable Washington to expand its influence in air and naval operations in the Arctic, as well as space.

“There are also economic incentives. Rising temperatures associated with climate change are making Greenland’s rare earth metals such as lithium, a critical mineral for electric vehicles and batteries, more accessible. A 2023 report by the Danish government detailed Greenland’s potential as a deposit of critical raw materials, many of which are used in the green energy transition. (The United States currently relies heavily on China for rare earth minerals.) Greenland is also believed to possess enormous untapped oil and gas reserves; a 2008 estimate by the U.S. Geological Survey put the amount at approximately thirty-one billion barrels of oil equivalent (BOE)—the amount of energy contained in one barrel of crude oil—though the island banned all oil and gas exploration in 2021 over environmental concerns.”

“Meanwhile, Greenland’s ice sheet, which covers roughly 80 percent of the island, is experiencing accelerating melting, making Arctic trade routes more navigable; these include the Northeast and Northwest Passages. Greater availability could potentially open up shorter and faster trade routes between Asia, Europe, and North America, positioning Greenland as an international maritime hub.”

1. “During World War II, the U.S. military built a significant wartime presence on the then Danish colony, helping to patrol and protect it from Axis powers and supporting various Allied operations. Denmark itself was occupied by Nazi Germany from 1940 to 1945. President Harry Truman viewed postwar Greenland as a prime location for permanent U.S. military assets that could detect and counter major air strikes—including nuclear strikes—by the Soviet Union. In 1951, the United States signed a treaty with Denmark that allowed Washington to retain its military bases on Greenland, as well as establish new bases or “defense areas” if NATO deemed necessary.  Today, the only operable U.S. base on Greenland is Pituffik Space Base (formerly Thule Air Base), which was created in 1951 and has been under U.S. Space Force command since 2020. The northernmost U.S. military base, Pituffik is home to approximately two hundred active-duty personnel as well as missile defense and space surveillance equipment—including radar that provides early warnings and detection for intercontinental ballistic missiles launched from Russia.”
2. Eight countries, including the United States, have territory in the Arctic. In recent years, Western powers have raised concerns about Chinese and Russian expansionism in the region.

• Russia boasts the largest territorial presence in the Arctic, with its border making up more than 50 percent of the Arctic coastline. In recent years, Russian military activity in the region—which peaked during the Soviet Union era—has increased. Additionally, experts say Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022 has threatened its relations with other Arctic states; the outbreak of war prompted Finland and Sweden to join NATO.
• China, too, has boosted its regional presence, calling itself a “near-Arctic state” and seeking to increase its economic and military role there. China has four icebreaking vessels, for example—compared to Russia’s roughly forty and the United States’ one—and has sought to access the region’s natural resources and establish new trade routes. In a 2014 speech, Chinese President Xi Jinping stated the country’s desire to become a so-called polar power. In 2024, China sent three icebreakers into Arctic waters for the first time. Together, China and Russia have conducted joint military exercises in the Arctic, sparking concern among U.S. officials.

But how should we think about Trump’s obsession with taking Greenland? Holman W. Jenkins, Jr. of the Wall Street Journal offers a wise and helpful analysis of Trump’s obsession with Greenland:  “If Donald Trump’s foolishness over Greenland gets out of hand, recall the U.S. Senate has ratified numerous treaties codifying U.S. duties under the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, which under the U.S. Constitution are now the ‘supreme law of the land.’ NATO’s Article 1, for instance, makes it illegal for the U.S. to exercise the ‘threat or use of force in any manner inconsistent with the purposes of the United Nations.’ The U.N. Charter, adopted by the Senate 89-2 in 1945, giving it also the force of U.S. law, bans the U.S. from issuing the ‘threat or use of force against the territorial integrity’ of a nonoffending member state. In 2023, for the benefit of any adjudicating judge, Congress further expressed its will by preventing a president from withdrawing from NATO without a two-thirds Senate vote.”

“The whole kerfuffle fits better under the heading: Why is he throwing his presidency away? The mysteries of personality will always be with us. Mr. Trump can turn 180 degrees yet never admit doubt or a mistake. But his strangest quality may be the pleasure he gives himself by constantly talking about his desired triumphs as if he has already achieved them. At 79, he may even be flirting with cognitive decline for all we know. Yet wrapped up in his peculiarity has been a knack for rubbing America’s face in realities . . . Mr. Trump’s preoccupation with owning Greenland, like his Nobel Prize obsession, would be best addressed elsewhere: in therapy. I’m perfectly serious. Once he started unburdening himself of his insecurities and traumas, he probably wouldn’t stop for a week. The world, and the U.S., would be better for it.”

Finally, Tom Friedman offers an additional insight into the character of Donald Trump:  “What American president would ever write the text that Trump wrote to Norway’s prime minister, Jonas Gahr Store . . . claiming that one reason he is pushing to acquire Greenland is that he was not awarded the Nobel Peace Prize? He wrote, ‘Considering your Country decided not to give me the Nobel Peace Prize for having stopped 8 Wars PLUS, I no longer feel an obligation to think purely of Peace, although it will always be predominant, but can now think about what is good and proper for the United States of America.’ Read those words over slowly. They don’t scream ‘America first.’ They scream ‘Me first.’ They scream ‘I, Donald Trump, am ready to seize Greenland, at the price of breaking up the nearly 77-year-old NATO alliance, because the Nobel Committee did not give ME its peace prize last year’—ignoring the fact that the Norwegian government doesn’t control the awarding of the prize.”

He observes another consequence of Trump’s obsession with Greenland: “Russia and China dreamed that one day something would happen where America would lose its allies and NATO would be fractured. Without economic allies, America could never be as influential in trade negotiations with China, and without America’s military might, NATO would be hard pressed to prevent Russia from retaking parts of Central and Eastern Europe that it lost control over after the fall of the Berlin Wall.  And then one day their dreams came true. The American people elected a man who, no matter what he tells us, is taking us to a future not of ‘America first,’ but of ‘America alone’ and ‘Me first.’”

See Diana Roy, Council on Foreign Relations (22 January 2026); Holman W. Jenkins, Jr. in the Wall Street Journal (21 January 2026); and Thomas Friedman in the New York Times (22 January 2026).