By Kevin L. (CDNP)
Just a few days after the new year, President Donald Trump has already revived the thought of purchasing Greenland, a semi-autonomous part of Denmark, for the sake of national security and extracting vital resources. However, it has been insisted the island was not for sale, with the Danish MP stating how “it’s an integrated part of our country [Danish Kingdom]”. Yet Trump has remained adamant about his ambitions.
Although the topic of purchasing Greenland may bring chuckles and witty one-liners, the impact it has on U.S. interests in the next decade can certainly not be overlooked. The largest island in the world holds wealth and power under its ice sheets, which explains why it is a hot topic at the dinner table of the United States.
However, Trump isn’t the first president to set his eyes on the Arctic island. This interest initially began in the early 19th century, when Secretary of State William Seward began looking at Greenland after recently purchasing Alaska from Russia. The Truman administration then offered $100 million in today’s money to purchase Greenland after World War II. This begs the question: why is this seemingly cold and desolate island so sought after by a global power?
Rich in Resources
Beneath the thick ice sheets of Greenland is a variety of minerals, oil and natural gas. Among these resources is zinc, copper and lead, which are essential in roofing, electrical wiring and technology. It is also estimated that there are 1.5 million tonnes of rare and essential earth metals, particularly neodymium, a crucial component in electric vehicles, wind turbines and general manufacturing. Combined with iron and boron, neodymium can create strong yet lightweight magnets, which has played a role in medical imaging, electric vehicles and cell phones as well. Elements such as these fuel the world’s technological advancements, and also quenches consumer demand. Overall, Greenland’s rare earth metal reserves account for over a quarter of the global demand, and 10% of the world’s overall resources.
Furthermore, the exploration of Greenland has only increased after the Second World War, especially with the discovery of oil and gas beneath its icy terrain. Scientists estimate that there are approximately 17 billion barrels of oil and 138.000 billion cubic feet of natural gas nestled in Greenland’s surrounding waters. With overconsumption and advances in technology, along with geopolitical issues, Greenland may soon be stripped of its resources, and Trump wants to be the first in line.
But beneath the resource race lies a deeper issue: the pattern of American expansionism which often prioritises economic interests over the rights and wellbeing of indigenous and local populations. The pursuit of Greenland’s land for material gain without consent from its people revives troubling issues of past imperial practices—where land is treated as a commodity, and native voices are silenced.
Geopolitical Advantages
In a recent interview, President Trump described the geopolitical advantage of Greenland: “We need greater national security purposes,” Trump told reporters. “I’ve been told that for a long time, long before I even ran”. Besides the immense amount of resources it holds, Greenland opens up sea lanes for cheaper overseas shipping, and it is also the closest checkpoint between Europe and the Americas.
Due to Greenland’s proximity to these two powerful continents, it is also a commercial hub for cheap overseas trading. The gradual warming of the world melts the surrounding ice of Greenland, opening up new routes for export. It also acts as a crucial monitoring system for ballistic missile attacks on the US, as it has a clear and seemingly unsuspecting view on the world.
However, a crucial explanation to the U.S occupying Greenland traces back to World War II, when America initially took Greenland to protect it after Denmark was seized by the Nazi Regime. However, the cold relationship between America and Denmark was somewhat settled with the 1951 Defense of Greenland Treaty, which obliged both countries to protect the island as it lacks an independent military. In the mid 1950s, the US established a military base (the Pituffik Space Base, formerly the Thule Base) which provides early warning of potential Soviet missiles, offers space surveillance and enables long-range radio communications.
Yet this legacy of occupation and militarisation again raises ethical concerns. The establishment of a major U.S. base without full consent from Greenland’s indigenous population demonstrates how large-scale military strategy can override local autonomy. The tension lies in a world power asserting control in the name of “protection,” while often oppressing the very people it claims to protect from such processes.
“Greenland Is Not For Sale!”
However, there is geopolitical pressure from Denmark and other European countries about the US occupying the island. Denmark, a long term US ally such as during the Cold War, has insisted Greenland was for its inhabitants. Even Greenland’s prime minister Mute Egede, although he does want to gain independence from Denmark, has also reiterated this point. This message of disapproval has resonated throughout Europe, posing as a warning for the US.
More competitive pressure also comes from Eurasia, especially China and Russia, who have similar plans to America in claiming Greenland. Russia plans on reinforcing its ballistic missile submarines in the Arctic, along with implementing cheaper maritime shipping, especially considering the Northern Sea Route from Eurasia to Asia Pacific is nearly one third of the distance than traveling through the Suez Canal. Then, Beijing created the Polar Silk Road in 2017, a maritime route which connects East Asia to the Arctic for purposes of infrastructure, expansion and resource mining.
So, although the US had its foot in the door first, the rest of the world won’t make claiming Greenland an easy task. Yet all this competition underscores a troubling truth: global powers continue to view land primarily through the lens of resource extraction, often ignoring the environmental cost as well as the lives of indigenous peoples. This transactional view of sovereignty continues a legacy of imperialism, just under a modern guise.
Geographical Challenges
However, besides pressure from other countries, the natural geography of Greenland also hinders the US from accessing its resources. The harsh climate and lack of infrastructure in Greenland pose a challenge to accessing resource reserves, keeping in mind the cold as well. In truth, Greenland is like a soft boiled egg, a bland white outer layer encasing rich yellow ooze.
Kilometer-long sheets of ice blanket the surface of the island, and only the most resilient mosses and low-lying shrubs can endure the -18℃ average temperature. Almost 90% of Greenland is permanently covered in ice, categorizing it as a vast, treeless tundra. There are no marked roads outside major cities in Greenland, making access to mines more like backcountry skiing than trails at a ski resort: unmarked and dangerous. This makes extraction costly and time consuming, two things the US are not keen on.
However, as the race to exploit Earth’s final frontiers intensifies, the United States must ask itself whether asserting control over smaller populations aligns with its democratic values and moral responsibility — or whether they will simply repeat a long pattern of modern imperialism under a new flag.
Works Cited
Blanca Marabini San Martín. “De-risking rare earths: The Greenland stalemate and the critical raw materials act.” chinaobservers, 30 May 2023, chinaobservers.eu/de-risking-rare-earths-the-greenland-stalemate-and-the-critical-raw-materials-act/.
“China failed its Arctic ambitions in Greenland.” POLITICO, 25 Oct. 2022, www.politico.eu/article/china-arctic-greenland-united-states/.
“China failed its Arctic ambitions in Greenland.” POLITICO, 25 Oct. 2022, www.politico.eu/article/china-arctic-greenland-united-states/.
Derouin, S. “Greenland is getting a lot of international attention for its mineral resources – but what is hiding under the ice?” BBC Breaking News, World News, US News, Sports, Business, Innovation, Climate, Culture, Travel, Video & Audio, 22 Jan. 2025, www.bbc.com/future/article/20250121-the-enormous-challenge-of-mining-greenland.
Devyatkin, P. “Uncertainty and tension: Russia reacts to Trump’s Greenland proposal.” The Arctic Institute – Center for Circumpolar Security Studies, 14 Jan. 2025, www.thearcticinstitute.org/uncertainty-tension-russia-reacts-trumps-greenland-proposal/.
“Here’s why Greenland is strategically important to the U.S.” National Geographic, 23 Jan. 2025, www.nationalgeographic.com/history/article/greenland-us-purchase-history-wwii.
Paddison, L. “Trump wants to buy Greenland again. Here’s why he’s so interested in the world’s largest island.” CNN, 8 Jan. 2025, edition.cnn.com/2025/01/07/climate/trump-greenland-climate/index.html.
Russell, L. “Why does Trump want Greenland and the Panama Canal?” Sky News, 8 Jan. 2025, news.sky.com/story/why-does-trump-want-greenland-and-the-panama-canal-13285350.
“Russia in the Arctic—A critical examination.” Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, carnegieendowment.org/research/2021/03/russia-in-the-arctica-critical-examination?lang=en.
The Times and The Sunday Times. “Danish MP tells Trump to f*** off over sale of Greenland.” YouTube, 22 Jan. 2025, www.youtube.com/watch?v=ImtRaTjAF9Y.
“Topography of Greenland.” NASA Earth Observatory, 26 Dec. 2004, earthobservatory.nasa.gov/images/5118/topography-of-greenland#:~:text=Roughly%2085%25%20of%20the%20island,for%20our%20future%20climate%2C%20too.
Østhagen, A. “Dimensions of oil and gas development in Greenland.” The Arctic Institute – Center for Circumpolar Security Studies, 29 July 2024, www.thearcticinstitute.org/dimensions-oil-gas-development-greenland/.
