Former President Donald Trump has once again articulated his belief that the United States “needs” to acquire Greenland, citing national security imperatives. During a press conference in Florida, Trump emphasized the island’s strategic importance, suggesting it is crucial for American protection. This renewed assertion follows his recent appointment of a special envoy to the semi-autonomous Danish territory, a move that has already drawn strong criticism from Greenlandic and Danish officials.
Trump’s rationale for seeking control over Greenland centers on countering the perceived influence of Russia and China in the Arctic region. He alleged that both nations have naval presences in the area, which he views as a direct threat to U.S. interests. While he downplayed any interest in Greenland’s mineral resources, his focus remains on its geopolitical significance in a changing global landscape.
Adding an unusual historical claim, Trump suggested that the U.S. had a naval presence in Greenland approximately 300 years ago. This assertion, however, is historically inaccurate, as significant U.S. involvement in Greenland exploration and presence did not emerge until much later, in the late 19th century. Indigenous Inuit populations have inhabited Greenland for millennia, with European contact dating back to the late 10th century.
Furthermore, Trump inaccurately portrayed Denmark as not adequately supporting Greenland’s development. This contradicts recent actions, as Denmark pledged a substantial $253 million investment package for the territory over multiple years. The former president’s remarks appear to disregard the ongoing Danish commitment to the island’s welfare and infrastructure.
The appointment of Louisiana Governor Jeff Landry as a special envoy has been met with a resolute defense of sovereignty from Denmark and Greenland. Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen and Greenlandic counterpart Jens-Frederik Nielsen issued a joint statement affirming that national borders and state sovereignty are protected by international law and cannot be annexed, even under the guise of security concerns.
Denmark’s response has been firm, including summoning the U.S. ambassador to Copenhagen to seek clarification on American intentions. This diplomatic engagement underscores the seriousness with which Copenhagen views Trump’s persistent interest in Greenland, a topic that had seemed to recede from public discourse until recently.
Earlier in Trump’s presidency, discussions about acquiring Greenland were more pronounced, including a visit by Vice President Mike Pence to a U.S. base on the island. At one point, Trump did not rule out the possibility of using force to achieve his objectives, further escalating tensions and prompting Denmark to seek assurances regarding U.S. espionage activities in the region.
