To incite the most raucous of chortles, U.S. President Donald Trump has been rather frank about his keen interest to have the United States acquire Greenland. He cautioned that should negotiations fail, the U.S. may seek to acquire it “the hard way.” While this claim has been widely mocked, it has at least ignited new discussion over the geopolitical implications of the move. This is the argument Denmark and its leaders are fighting against.
The former president’s comments come against a backdrop of increasingly extreme rhetoric since his return to the White House last year. He stated that the U.S. “needs Greenland for the purpose of national security,” emphasizing that ownership of the territory was “psychologically needed for success.” He continued to clarify that military control of Greenland would give the U.S. strategic benefits not possible through just diplomatic treaties.
The President disembarked from Air Force One wearing a cap emblazoned with “USA,” signaling his commitment to American interests abroad. He’s been obsessed with Greenland for years. In 2019, as president in his first term, he went so far as to propose purchasing the territory.
Expert analyses have suggested that a takeover of Greenland could cost the U.S. as much as $700 billion (£520 billion), raising questions about the feasibility and consequences of such an undertaking. Over time, as reporters investigated this story Trump’s rhetoric has become even more extreme. He proclaimed that it would be “unacceptable” for any other country to possess control over Greenland.
Denmark’s Prime Minister Jens-Frederik Nielsen has already tersely rebuffed these assertions, insisting that Greenland would be ruled by Copenhagen, not Washington. He emphasized Denmark’s commitment to peaceful dialogue and cooperation, stating, “If we have to choose between the US and Denmark here and now, we choose Denmark, NATO and the EU.”
French President Emmanuel Macron was singing from the same hymn sheet. He proceeded to stand in solidarity with Denmark, declaring that “borders cannot be changed by force” and underlined the need to defend the sovereignty of smaller countries. He stated, “If the sovereignty of an EU country and ally were to be affected, the knock-on effects would be unprecedented.”
Public opposition to the possible use of military force to find an adult acquisition for Greenland is unanimous. In a recent YouGov poll, just 4% said they considered military action to be a “good idea.” This accounted for only one out of ten Republicans, and almost not a single Democrat.
His earlier remarks on Denmark’s defense of Greenland, calling it home to “two dogsleds,” have raised eyebrows. Political analysts and international relations experts are especially critical of these comments. As tensions build, analysts and policy-makers alike are cautioning against the consequences this can have on U.S.-European relations and the stability of NATO itself.
The idea of conquering Greenland has sent a shiver of fear through the great capitals of Europe. For their part, Danish officials have been just as adamant in declaring their opposition to Greenland’s independence. They call for real conversations, aimed at collaboration rather than conflict. Mette Frederiksen, Denmark’s Minister for Social Affairs and Senior Citizens, stated, “For me, it’s important that the Greenlanders know and they know this by the deeds, not only by the words, that we respect the wishes of the Greenlanders and their interests.”
The international community has been closely watching to see if Trump will relent on his decision regarding Greenland. His pronouncements imply even an eagerness to amp up the pressure when needed, making the world wonder what comes next.
“If we don’t do it the easy way, we’re going to do it the hard way.” – Donald Trump
With the years of quiet diplomacy seeming to reach an end, the course of this crisis is yet to be seen. The urgency and aggression implied by Trump could not be further from Denmark’s offer to discuss a peaceful solution.