Donald Trump: ‘We are going to do something on Greenland whether they like it or not’

The Arctic Gambit: Trump’s Unfinished Business with Greenland

It feels like a case of déjà vu, but with a significantly higher stakes. Back in 2019, when Donald Trump first floated the idea of the United States purchasing Greenland, the world largely treated it as a surreal punchline. Copenhagen’s response was a blunt "not for sale," and the diplomatic spat that followed—including a canceled state visit—seemed to relegate the idea to the "strange but true" archives of history.

Fast forward to 2026, and the narrative has shifted from an eccentric real estate proposition to a cornerstone of a revived "America First" geopolitical strategy. Following his return to the White House, the rhetoric surrounding the world’s largest island has intensified, culminating in the provocative stance: "We are going to do something on Greenland whether they like it or not."

Why Greenland? Why Now?

To understand why the administration is doubling down, one has to look past the frozen tundra and toward the seabed. Greenland is no longer just a strategic outpost; it is a treasure trove of the 21st century's most valuable resources:

• Rare Earth Minerals: As the global race for electric vehicle batteries and high-tech defense systems heats up, Greenland’s untapped deposits of neodymium and praseodymium have become vital to national security.
• The Northern Sea Route: With Arctic ice thinning, the region is becoming a maritime highway. Controlling or influencing Greenland means controlling the gateway between the Atlantic and the Pacific.
• The China Factor: Washington is increasingly wary of Chinese investment in Arctic infrastructure. For the Trump administration, a "hands-off" approach is no longer an option.

"Whether They Like It or Not"

The recent rhetoric marks a departure from the "purchase" talk of 2019. The current administration appears to be pivoting toward a policy of "Assertive Presence." This includes:

1. Expanded Military Footprint: Moving beyond Thule Air Base (now Pituffik Space Base) to establish more permanent radar and maritime surveillance capabilities.
2. Economic Leverage: Offering massive infrastructure "partnerships" that some critics in Nuuk and Copenhagen describe as a "soft-power takeover."
3. Diplomatic Pressure: Bypassing Copenhagen to negotiate directly with Greenlandic local authorities on mining rights and port access.

The View from Nuuk and Copenhagen

The reaction on the ground has been a mix of defiance and pragmatic anxiety. Greenland’s Prime Minister has remained steadfast: Greenland is a self-governing territory within the Kingdom of Denmark, and its sovereignty is not a commodity.

However, there is an internal debate brewing. Some Greenlandic leaders see the American interest as a chance to finally gain the economic independence needed to fully break away from Denmark. Others fear that "doing something" on Greenland—without local consent—could lead to a new era of Arctic colonialism.

"We are a partner, not a property," has become the unofficial slogan of the Greenlandic resistance to the renewed American overtures.

The Geopolitical Fallout

The Trump administration's "Arctic push" has sent ripples through the Arctic Council. Russia, which has its own massive military build-up in the north, views the U.S. stance as a direct provocation. Meanwhile, European allies are caught in the middle, trying to balance their defense reliance on the U.S. with their commitment to international law and Danish sovereignty.

Conclusion

Whether the "something" the administration intends to do is a formal lease, a strategic partnership, or a more forceful assertion of military necessity, one thing is clear: Greenland is at the center of the new Cold War. The administration's latest comments signal that the U.S. is no longer asking for a seat at the Arctic table—it is moving to head the table.