President Donald Trump is right that Greenland harbors immense strategic value, for it commands a large part of the Arctic where China and Russia are building and encroaching. But he is wrong to threaten Denmark to cede sovereignty. The president should instead pursue a compromise that fulfills U.S. security needs without jeopardizing America’s moral standing and NATO alliances.
Trump wants Greenland for two reasons. First, American ownership of the island would allow the United States to militarily dominate the Arctic north. Second, because Greenland holds massive oil, rare earth mineral and fishing reserves, and would put especially the first of these into U.S. hands as a counterbalance to China’s current dominance of that important commodity.
WHY TRUMP IS SO INTERESTED IN GREENLAND
Trump’s obstacle, and it’s an impassable one, is that Greenland and Denmark adamantly refuse to transfer the island to the U.S. While the Trump administration has pushed Greenlanders to pursue independence from Denmark, the president’s rhetoric is complicating matters and working against his stated goal. It led to the surprise victory in last year’s elections of a government that was less friendly to independence from Denmark.
Trump’s rhetoric is a problem. It undermines America’s post-Second World War order, which is based on respect for democratic sovereignty. When Trump talks about Greenland, he sounds less like the strategically minded Andrew Jackson, whom he understandably admires, and more like Saddam Hussein. He also significantly jeopardizes America’s relationship with its NATO allies. Few of them are as staunch as Denmark, which fought alongside Americans in Afghanistan and Iraq and suffered heavy losses equivalent in proportional terms to the U.S. losing 2,335 soldiers.
NATO’s security and political value remains immense. Even in Trump’s preferred economic terms, its worth is obvious. In 2025, NATO members imported $1.1 trillion in American goods and services and invested roughly $300 billion more in the U.S., supporting American jobs. But Trump is rattling our allies. Some are staging joint military exercises in Greenland in response to his threats. U.S. military leaders share their alarm about what the president is saying. If Trump launched an unprovoked attack on an ally, nearly the entire Joint Chiefs of Staff would probably resign — with only the vice chairman remaining to preserve civil-military continuity.
TRUMP FIRST YEAR REPORT CARD: A- PROMISE KEEPER OR ‘NIGHTMARE’ FAILURE
What’s so silly about Trump’s aggressive rhetoric is that it is unnecessary. Denmark has already reached out very clearly to accommodate American strategic and military needs. A compromise could be reached to satisfy everyone.
Trump should seek an agreement with Denmark and Greenland that allows much higher U.S. military deployments on the island, and perhaps a grant of energy and rare earth mineral mining rights as compensation for the greatly expanded and vital defense of Europe and the North Atlantic that that enhanced presence would bring. This approach would clearly be a win-win for both the U.S. and Greenland-Denmark.
The U.S. already operates Pituffik Space Base in Greenland, but expanding deployments there would strengthen America’s ability to project power in the Arctic. Denmark and Greenland have made clear they would welcome a larger U.S. presence. That deterrent matters as Russia ramps up its Arctic presence, investing in nuclear icebreakers and submarines designed to expand control over northern sea lanes. Denmark is stepping up defenses, but it still needs U.S. power to keep Greenland secure.
A Danish grant of energy extraction efforts would provide economic benefits to all three parties. Greenland is believed to hold some of the richest reserves of oil and rare earth minerals on the planet. But because extracting resources in these cold, icy and hard-to-reach areas would be expensive, the U.S. government and private extraction-energy companies would be instrumental to providing the tens of billions of dollars in original investments needed to start the extraction process.
Once oil and minerals began flowing, the United States could pay royalties to Greenland and Denmark, giving both governments major new annual revenue at no added cost. Denmark and the rest of Europe would also benefit from a steady supply of abundant, low-cost energy and minerals.
It would also ease Europe’s pressure to reopen Russian energy exports to lower household costs — pressure Moscow exploits to weaken NATO and soften resistance to its aggression in Ukraine and its covert operations. A Greenland extraction hub would likewise blunt China’s leverage from rare earth exports. And if Denmark’s climate concerns remain, the U.S. could offer offsets or compensation to address them.
MARK CUBAN SLAMS HOSPITALS FOR INFLATING HEALTHCARE COSTS
The key, then, is for Trump to take stock of what he can get versus what he cannot get.
He can get an artful deal with Denmark and Greenland that would manifestly serve American security and economic interests. He cannot invade Greenland or otherwise seize the territory without catastrophic costs to America’s moral and strategic standing.