Buy Greenland

Donald Trump claims to have given up on conquering Greenland militarily, but he still wants the large ice island to become part of the United States. The topic acquiring Greenland had been dormant since 1955, until Trump brought it back to light in 2019 during his first presidency. In 2025, the re-elected president seemed more serious than ever, having even begun negotiations with Denmark, the legitimate owner. The latter has left the decision about its future in the hands of the Greenlandic people, while at the same time committing itself, with the strong support of other European countries, to ensuring that Greenland's rights are respected.

Ties with Denmark: A century-long bond

Greenland is an autonomous territory belonging to the Danish Crown. In 1953, Denmark included Greenland as a territory within its own country, since, until then, it had been just another colony, since 1814 when it ceased to be under Norwegian-Danish rule.

status is unique: on the one hand, the island has its own government and parliament, with authority over internal affairs such as Economics social security; on the other hand, Denmark is responsible for the island's external affairs such as defense, monetary policy, and immigration. This relationship between Copenhagen and Nuuk is called 'Rigsfællesskabet' ('Commonwealth' of the Crown).

While Greenland was incorporated into the Kingdom of Denmark as another territory in 1953, it was granted the degree scroll autonomous territory in 1979. Subsequently, in 2009, a large issue powers, such as self-government, were transferred to the Greenlandic local government, which meant a huge increase in the burden of responsibility. The Act on Greenland Self-Government ( 2009) established the Greenlandic parliament, or Inatsisartut, although Nuuk also appoints two deputies to the Danish Parliament. It should be noted that both reforms to Greenland's political status were made as a result of a referendum among Greenlanders, which effectively reaffirms the application to the island's inhabitants of the principle of self-determination of peoples as enshrined in international law. This implies the right of the people of Greenland to choose their form of government, their Economics, as well as their society and culture.

Although it is striking, and unlike Denmark, Greenland is not a member of the European Union. This non-membership of the EU could perhaps facilitate not only independence from Denmark, but also a rapprochement with the United States.

Possible implications of independence

status is controversial, as while some of its inhabitants want independence, others see Greenland as a fundamental part of Danish territory. In any case, the inhabitants of Greenland would be responsible for deciding whether or not they want independence for their territory. The United States could not buy it as one might buy a toy, as international law safeguards the self-determination of peoples. This has been established in Danish law since 2009, on the basis of which Greenland can acquire its independence at any time.

If the Greenlandic people were to seriously consider independence from Denmark, negotiations would first have to begin between the Naalakkersuisut, the Government of Greenland, and the Government of Denmark. Secondly, any agreement on independence would have to be C the Inatsisartut and put to a referendum in which Greenlanders, not Danes, would participate, although C by the Danish parliament. Through this process, Greenland would acquire sovereignty over its own territory.

The previous Greenlandic government had already declared that independence was the goal, and in fact, this was expected to be the topic in the elections that took place on the island in April 2025. In line with this, the new government that emerged from those recent elections brings together four of the five parliamentary forces, which hold 23 of the 31 seats in the chamber and include all moderate independence supporters.

Given all of the above, Greenland must not lose sight of the fact that its Economics depends heavily on subsidies from the Danish government, which account for no less than one-fifth of Greenland's GDP.

Reasons behind the US interest

Greenland is a giant island with little tourist appeal, as 80% of its surface area is ice, it is sparsely populated (only 56,000 inhabitants in 2.2 million square kilometers), and it is inhospitable. However, it is of great geopolitical importance, which is reason enough for it to be in the spotlight of any world power. Given its location near the Arctic, it is a core topic global trade and security.

It is also rich in natural resources, such as minerals and oil. Logically, Trump is interested in Greenland for both reasons. But rivalry with Russia and China, and the melting ice cap on the island—which will open up new shipping routes and improve access to natural resources—also appear to be relevant factors.

Although what the US president is proposing may seem crazy, he is not the first to consider the idea. The truth is that the US aspiration to bring Greenland under its sovereignty is anything but new, as the United States has had an interest in Greenland since the 19th century. This island belongs to Denmark, just as the Danish West Indies, a former Danish colony in the Caribbean Sea that the US bought in 1917 (the Virgin Islands, just east of Puerto Rico), belonged to Denmark. This means that Washington has already done business with the Danish government in the past. But why, then, has it not managed to annex the great ice island?

In 1867, with the acquisition of Alaska following its purchase from Russia, the US government already considered buying Greenland from Denmark. However, it was not until World War II that the US began to exert its influence on the island. Taking advantage of Hitler's occupation of Denmark, the Americans established a military presence that would last for decades. This move did not entirely displease the Danes, who felt somewhat protected from Hitler by the presence of US troops in Greenland, even though they were 3,000 km away.

At the end of World War II, Denmark was no longer interested in having the United States present in one of its territories and invited it to leave Greenland. The US response was negative, arguing that, even after the war had ended, the danger from the Soviet Union remained. Furthermore, in 1951, an agreement was signed agreement Denmark and the US regulating the US military presence in Greenland. Years earlier, in 1946, Washington had already offered $100 million in gold bullion for the island, proposal the Danish government rejected (there has now been speculation about possible prices, but the White House has not actually put forward any figures it was considering).

The US presence in Greenland continues to this day. In 2023, a ten-year security treaty was signed whereby Denmark allows the US military presence throughout the island. That is why many experts on the subject that, although it has been implicit and through the Danish invitation, the United States has already occupied Greenland, albeit militarily.

Despite this agreement, Denmark has strengthened its defense on the island following Trump's threats, expressing his desire to annex Greenland; Copenhagen has announced an increase in military presence in the region starting this January. According to Denmark, this mission statement its troops to operate more effectively in the harsh conditions of the island.

Leaving the military sphere aside, there have been certain political events worth mentioning, although their relevance has mainly been in the media. On January 14, a meeting took place meeting the White House between Lars Rasmussen, Danish Minister of Foreign Affairs; Vivian Motzfeldt, Greenland's representative for foreign affairs; J. D. Vance, US Vice President; and framework , Secretary of State. No rapprochement of positions was achieved in these talks.

Greenland has assured that it will cooperate in the negotiations as much as possible. At the same time, it has shown considerable reluctance to become part of the United States. Although the island's current prime minister (who has the support of three-quarters of the population) is a moderate independence supporter, he has made it clear that Greenland will remain part of the Danish kingdom for the foreseeable future.

Domestic repercussions: What would happen to the Greenlanders?

At first glance, it seems clear that Economics would receive a significant boost if it became part of the United States, although it could also develop economic dependence on the American superpower. However, in light of the possible annexation, it would be more relevant to ask whether Greenland would become another US state, or rather a territory with special status , as it currently has with Denmark.

The US Constitution leaves the door open for the incorporation of new states. Specifically, the constitutional process would first require the approval of an rule by the House and Senate admitting the new state. After the signature , the rule would need to rule a simple majority of votes and could not be repealed.

If Greenland were not incorporated as another state, it could be under US sovereignty, but as a territory with some local autonomy. This is not a status , as 31 of the current 50 US states have gone through this condition. However, the last time this happened in a populated territory was with the annexation of Hawaii in 1959. Greenland could also become an unincorporated territory, as is the case with Puerto Rico or Guam, which do not even vote in federal elections. However, given Trump's interest in exercising control over the island, this option would not be the most feasible.

Another question that needs to be raised is the nationality of Greenlanders following a hypothetical US annexation. Would they lose their Danish nationality? Would all citizens obtain dual nationality? Or would only those born after the secession be US citizens?

According to the 14th Amendment to the US Constitution, "all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to its jurisdiction, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside." So, in principle, if Greenland became another state, its inhabitants plenary session of the Executive Council to become US citizens. And, since both U.S. and Danish law allow dual citizenship, Greenlanders could, unless otherwise agreed, acquire both.

External repercussions: Annexation in the international order

The incorporation of Greenland as a US territory would be a major event on the international stage and would have repercussions for other world powers, such as China, Russia, and the European Union itself.

As far as China is concerned, the relationship between the Asian power and the United States is not one of intense enmity, although neither is it exactly one of allies, as the tension that has existed between the two for decades is well known. Today, China is the leader in the supply chain for critical minerals, accounting for more than half of the world's production of rare earth minerals. This status the United States behind the red giant in this area, and Greenland could be a way to tip the balance.

As for Russia, given its enormous presence in the Arctic, it could view the US annexation of Greenland as a threat, further disrupting the current international order. Something similar could happen in the relationship between the United States and the European Union, which would reach a peak of tension, especially if Trump decided to annex Greenland by force (something that, in any case, would require the permission of congress that authorization would be difficult to obtain, especially with a Republican decline in the midterm elections next November). However, the European Union's dependence on the subject defense could be an important card in the U.S. deck.

Given the current status , especially with Russia's invasion of Ukraine still unresolved, the role of the European Union is crucial but uncertain. The neutral stance on Greenland that it defended in 2025 took a radical turn at the beginning of 2026, when Trump revived his speech on Greenland.

On the one hand, countries such as France, Germany, and Sweden have confirmed 'symbolic' military movements in Greenland with the goal demonstrating their military capacity in the face of US threats. What has been dubbed'Operation Arctic Resilience'is nothing more than a sample logistical support by European countries for Danish sovereignty over the island.

On the other hand, France is calling for the application of the European Union's "anti-coercion instrument," which involves a series of measures against the United States to limit US trade and investment in the Union, recognizing Trump's actions as "blackmail." In this regard, imposing tariffs on the United States is one of the possible solutions to the US president's threats if diplomatic channels prove ineffective.

Another big question mark is what consequences the US acquisition of Greenland would have for NATO, of which Greenland is also an integral part. Given the US purchase of the island, it would be expected that some Alliance countries, especially European ones, would side with Denmark. The question remains as to whether any NATO members would support Trump's orders to annex Greenland.

The acquisition of Greenland by the United States has been on and off agenda and, therefore, has also fluctuated in terms of its importance to public opinion. Given the uncertainty and the sometimes unexpected responses from the US president, only time will tell how the many unresolved issues will be addressed. For now, Donald Trump is not giving up and continues to play games with the advertisement new meetings.

For now, pressure from key EU countries, the wishes expressed by the Greenlanders themselves, and an imaginative formula put forward by NATO to allow the US to have a greater military presence with a degree of sovereignty in certain locations seem to have defused the risk of unilateral action by Trump. However, the issue could become entrenched in the relationship between the US and Europe, exacerbating the mistrust that has already been evident.