Any plans for Greenland require diplomacy, and broad international agreement, and the mitigation of global harm, especially its climate impacts.
However, the geopolitical and geostrategic importance of the island continues to grow. The importance of Greenland’s natural resources continues to grow. Greenland is a potential source of minerals, including 39 of the 50 minerals and large reserves of rare earth elements (REEs), lead, zinc, silver and coal, iron, uranium, copper, tens of billions of barrels of undiscovered oil and gas, offshore reserves, twenty percent of the world’s freshwater, etc.
In 2023, Greenland had only two active mines, and mining remains challenging and controversial. Although climate and ecological considerations have limited resource exploitation, the melting of the ice has made Greenland’s mineral and hydrocarbon reserves more accessible and has attracted the attention of investors and actors.
In another dimension, Greenland lies along two or more important future shipping corridors: the northern coastline of North America, and the transpolar route in the Arctic Ocean. With global warming and in the next few decades, the transpolar sea route is likely to become more strategic.
As the ice melts, new routes around Greenland could reduce shipping times and bypass traditional routes, increasing the island’s geopolitical value.
Views of actors
Denmark allowed the United States to have a greater presence in Greenland in 1941. The United States has made attempts to purchase the island in 1867, 1944, and 2019. The increasing importance of the Arctic has become more apparent with the appointment of an ambassador to the Arctic, presenting a new security strategy in the summer of 2024.
Donald Trump recently called its purchase vital to protect the free world and protect national security. This approach has supporters in Republicans and the United States.
Although Denmark has focused on “ensuring American interests” even in strategies, and the US-Greenland Joint Committee has strengthened cooperation in four important areas, Washington seems to want much more.
Despite the great distance between Greenland and Denmark – Greenland was a Danish colony until 1953, but then became a region of Denmark. The island has its local government, two representatives in the Danish parliament, and a special relationship with the European Union.
The Greenland government manages most of Denmark’s domestic affairs and foreign, defense, and security policy. In 2024, Greenland published its Foreign, Defense, and Security Strategy 2024-2033.
As the island’s geopolitical importance has expanded, the local government has become more inclined to limit foreign ownership of domestic infrastructure. Along with the widespread attention to expanding the previous autonomy and independence, the slogan “Greenland for the Greenlanders” has received more attention.
Also, although from the Danish perspective, the relationship between Greenland and Denmark is rooted in a history of several centuries, the issue of Greenland’s independence is still being discussed.
Denmark’s approach is “Greenland belongs to the Greenlanders,” opposing the sale of the island and strengthening the coordination of Danish and Greenlandic authorities, strengthening its military presence in Greenland, a greater presence of NATO, the transatlantic alliance, and the establishment of Western power in Greenland. Denmark is also trying to attract more support for Copenhagen’s position in Europe and reduce the intensity of further pressure from Washington.
In 2022-25, Russia’s relations with several other Arctic countries (Canada, Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, and Sweden) became more challenging. In addition to reopening former Arctic facilities, Russia has increased investment, fleet expansion, military exercises, and presence in the Arctic.
Since 2018, China has shown the details of its Arctic strategy, the construction of the “Polar Silk Road”. By declaring itself a country “close to the Arctic”, China has paid more serious attention to Greenland and, apart from its desire to participate in mining projects, is also Greenland’s largest trading partner.
While Washington fears the presence of other actors around Greenland, deepening China’s military cooperation with Russia in the region, and integrating Greenland into the Belt and Road Initiative.
Of course, many actors such as China and Russia do not want to see Greenland seized by Washington due to its central location. Some in Europe, such as Germany, consider Trump’s foreign policy “selfish or self-centered” and do not want Denmark to be alone against the United States.
The melting of the Greenland ice sheet is one of the biggest drivers of global sea level rise. While Arctic shipping has increased, the economic feasibility of extracting mineral resources is still difficult for some reason. There are many challenges to seizing Greenland, and the threat card of China or Russia cannot be used to increase US dominance.
Outlook
In the coming decades, Greenland’s geostrategic role in global security, North America, Europe, and the Arctic will increase. In the upcoming Greenland parliamentary elections, although pro-independence parties may see the island’s current and future geopolitical opportunities for independence as a salient point, a recent poll found that only 6 percent of Greenlanders were interested in a political alliance with the United States.
In the meantime, climate change, and Greenland’s other rich resources, are likely to increase geopolitical tensions. However, it should be noted that proposals to use force to control Greenland raise further international concerns and undermine the principle of self-determination, international law, and the global order.
Unilateral expansionist policies have disastrous consequences, often leading to geostrategic crises and instability. Any plans for Greenland require diplomacy, and broad international agreement, and the mitigation of global harm, especially its climate impacts.
Samyar Rostami is a political observer and senior researcher in international relations
