Why Greenland has drawn America for over a century of strategic interest

From Cold War defence pacts to Trump's annexation threats, the Arctic island has often found itself at the centre to Washington's strategic calculations

United States President Donald Trump has softened his rhetoric on Greenland, toning down earlier suggestions of annexing the island by force and stepping back from threats to impose tariffs on eight European allies who opposed his stance. The shift followed a meeting with North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (Nato) Secretary General Mark Rutte on Wednesday. 

Trump has nevertheless said a new deal related to Greenland is forthcoming and hinted at a proposed missile defence initiative known as the “Golden Dome”, which he said is linked to Greenland’s security. 

While details of the agreement have not been made public, preliminary assessments suggest it could allow a greater US military presence on the island, including additional troops and installations. 

The New York Times, citing senior US officials, reported that the framework under discussion could grant the US sovereignty over specific pockets of Greenlandic land, which would be treated as US sovereign territory. The proposal is reportedly modelled on Britain’s sovereign base areas in Cyprus. 

Greenland’s PM Jens-Frederik Nielsen and Denmark’s PM Mette Frederiksen have strongly opposed the idea, describing sovereignty as a “red line”. Trump’s repeated questioning of Greenland’s status, combined with his criticism of the costs of Nato’s collective defence, has alarmed European leaders. They fear Trump could use economic or military pressure against allies to advance strategic goals, raising concerns about Nato’s future and exposing internal fractures within the alliance. Nato’s collective defence, the bedrock of which is Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty, states that an armed attack against one member is to be treated as an attack against all, demanding immediate assistance, collective or individual.  

“Clearly the rules-based international order is under major stress, and Trump is a big factor in that,” Mike Albertus, professor of political science at the University of Chicago, told Business Standard. “He is threatening traditional allies and defending the use of American force wherever he chooses.” 

Albertus added: “I believe we are witnessing the end of the prior global era and the beginning of a new one — one that will be characterised more by force and the projection of military power than in recent decades.” 

The American gaze 

Greenland, the world’s largest island, is a semi-autonomous territory that has been part of the Kingdom of Denmark for roughly 305 years. Its location in the Arctic gives it major geostrategic importance. 

US interest in Greenland predates Trump. In the 1860s, US Secretary of State William Seward proposed purchasing Greenland from Denmark following the acquisition of Alaska from Russia in 1867. A 1868 report, which he commissioned, argued that the island was rich in fisheries and minerals. However, opposition in Congress and reluctance from Denmark halted the plan. The US later recognised Danish sovereignty over Greenland as part of the Danish West Indies (Virgin Islands) agreement. 

Greenland has hosted a US military presence since the Second World War. After Nazi Germany occupied Denmark in 1940, Danish ambassador to the US, Henrik Kauffmann, is believed to have acted on his own to authorise Washington to build airstrips and ports in Greenland under a 1941 defence agreement. There is a 2020 Danish drama film on Kauffmann and the signing of the Greenland treaty, which is titled The Good Traitor.  

Later, in 1946, the US, under President Harry S Truman, made a secret offer to buy Greenland for $100 million in gold, an offer Denmark rejected. 

Resource rich, but dependent 

A 1951 US-Denmark defence agreement allowed the US to maintain military installations on the island, including what is now known as Pituffik Space Base, a key node in missile warning and space surveillance systems. The agreement remains the legal foundation for the American presence in Greenland. 

Denmark’s chief negotiator later said the American draft of the pact gave the impression that Copenhagen had “practically sold Greenland to the US”. Denmark’s leverage, however, was limited by Nato’s doctrine of collective defence, which made Greenland critical to western security. Greenland was a crucial Arctic base throughout the Cold War but became less prominent after the collapse of the Soviet Union. However, as the Arctic ice melts, opening more shipping routes, the strategic value of Greenland becomes more important than ever.  

In 2019, Trump publicly revived the idea of buying Greenland, prompting strong objections from Denmark, which views the territory as an integral part of the kingdom. The following year, the US reopened its consulate in Greenland’s capital, Nuuk, after 67 years and expanded economic aid worth $12.1 million to support key industries such as mining and tourism. 

Despite its vast size, Greenland is sparsely populated and remains economically dependent on Danish subsidies and foreign investment. It also holds rare earth mineral reserves, which have drawn interest from major powers. 

China offered loans to finance airport construction projects on the island, raising concerns in Europe and the US. Denmark intervened to fund two-thirds of the projects to prevent Beijing from gaining a foothold in the region. In 2019, Shenghe Resources, a Chinese state-owned company, sought access for the exploration of Greenland’s rare earth minerals, a move blocked by Denmark and the US. To counter Chinese influence, the US later acquired the Tanbreez rare earth deposit in southern Greenland. China’s foreign ministry has dismissed concerns, saying the “so-called China threat” is groundless. 

While Trump’s renewed focus on Greenland has unsettled Europe, any decision on the island’s future must include the consent of Greenlanders themselves.  

Polling by research agency Verian shows most Greenlanders oppose US annexation and currently favour remaining with Denmark, although many view independence as a long-term goal. 

For now, the icy island remains a hotly debated territory.