“Donald Trump is again showing interest in Greenland, characterizing it as a “profitable real estate investment” and a strategic security issue for the United States. This has caused alarm in Denmark and among European leaders, who see it as a threat to NATO’s sovereignty and unity. The ice melts, and emotions flare up. The largest island in the world, which for centuries was considered a vast snow-white wasteland, unexpectedly […]”, — write: businessua.com.ua
The ice melts, and emotions flare up. The largest island in the world, which for centuries was considered an immeasurable snow-white wasteland, unexpectedly found itself at the epicenter of a geopolitical storm. The inspired President of the United States, Donald Trump, after the amazing operation in Venezuela, has seriously stepped up and is persistently moving forward in almost all directions.
At the beginning of his second term, Donald Trump constantly repeated that the United States “must get” Greenland, defining it as a matter of strategic and global security. It was primarily about the opposition between Russia and China in the Arctic. However, later the tension decreased, everyone got used to the “indiscretions” and empty promises of the US President. And here a well-known event occurs in Venezuela. Something is changing. America declares the Western Hemisphere an “exceptional zone” of its interests. In fact, Trump is retrieving the “Monroe Doctrine” of 1823 from the forgotten archives, adapting it to current realities. This is a return to the idea of ”America for Americans”, where any presence or influence of other countries in the Western Hemisphere is perceived as a direct threat to the United States.
The Monroe Doctrine was extremely important, and we have forgotten it, but we will not forget it again. Our new security strategy is leadership in the Western Hemisphere
– said Trump.
And it is a big trouble for little Denmark to control a huge island, which suddenly turns into the territory of the historical division of the world. Donald Trump’s new statements that the protection of Greenland is only “two sleds of dogs” caused genuine alarm in Copenhagen. Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen called this period a “critical moment”.
We are at a crossroads. If the Americans turn away from the Western alliance and threaten a partner, which we have not seen before, everything will stop
she said.
For Trump, Greenland is a “big real estate transaction.” For Denmark, this is a question of sovereignty and inviolability of the kingdom. But is the essence only in emotions? Trump points out that Denmark spends little money on the defense of the island, while the United States maintains the strategic Thule base there, which is part of the early warning system of a missile strike. And here is a rhetorical question: is Trump right?
And why is Greenland “green” at all? Let’s digress a bit. After looking at the map, and knowing English at least at the elementary school level, the question arises. Why is this white spot strangely called green? And all because the history of the name of Greenland is one of the first examples of successful marketing in history.
In the 10th century, Viking Erik the Red, exiled from Iceland for murder, sailed west and found a huge island. To lure colonists there, he named it Greenland (“Green Land”), although 80% of the territory is covered by ice. Instead, Iceland, which is actually much greener, got its name from the first settlers who arrived there in a harsh winter and saw only fjords filled with ice. Here is such an interesting, sometimes funny fact.
How did Greenland end up under Danish control? Greenland came under Danish control as a result of a long historical process that combined medieval harassment and colonial policy. In the 10th century, the island was settled by Norwegian Vikings (we already know who brought them there), and formally it was considered part of Norway, and later – the Danish-Norwegian Union. After the disappearance of the Scandinavian settlements in the 15th century, Greenland disappeared from the European political space for several centuries. Denmark established de facto control in 1721, when the missionary Hans Egede established the first permanent settlements with the support of the crown. In 1953, Denmark abolished Greenland’s colonial status and integrated it into the kingdom, granting citizens citizenship and parliamentary representation. Since 1979, Greenland has had autonomy, and since 2009 extended self-government, although defense and foreign policy remain with Denmark.
Why is Greenland an island of treasures and world domination? Why is the US so eager to control this island? As always, everything is about money, but not only that. Under the Greenland ice are deposits of oil, gas and, most importantly today, rare earth metals, which are needed for the production of smartphones and electric cars.
It’s not just states that are smart. China has actively sought to invest in Greenland airports and mines, but states have blocked these deals through Denmark, realizing that China’s economic presence in the Arctic is a direct threat to US national security.
And of course, where without Russians. Russia is militarizing the Arctic at a frantic pace. Greenland is an “unsinkable aircraft carrier” that controls the shortest route for missiles between the Russian Federation and the United States through the North Pole. Vice President of the United States Vance stated this very recently.
Have the Europeans and the Danes done everything necessary to protect Greenland and preserve its role as the basis of global security and anti-missile defense, the answer is obvious – no
Vance said.
That is, the politician hints that in the event of a nuclear war, Greenland will be of strategic importance in intercepting missiles.
The reaction of world leaders to the possible annexation of Greenland For the first time in many decades, Europeans talked about the USA not as a guarantor of security, but as a possible “risk”. Joint statement of EU leaders: On January 6, 2026, the key countries of Europe: France, Germany and Britain issued a statement that clearly emphasized: “Denmark and Greenland, and they alone, must determine their future.”
French President Emmanuel Macron and British Prime Minister Keir Starmer are trying to convince Trump that strategic goals (containment of China and Russia) can be achieved through strengthening existing agreements, not through annexation. The Netherlands and Norway: Separately emphasized that the sovereignty of a NATO ally is inviolable. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Norway stated: “The very idea of NATO will be destroyed if the US takes Greenland by force.”
Will NATO collapse over Greenland? The situation around Greenland strikes at the very heart of the Alliance – Article 5 on collective defense. If one NATO country (the USA) threatens the territorial integrity of another (Denmark), the Alliance loses its meaning. Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen directly warned: “If the USA attacks Greenland – everything will stop, including NATO.”
Radical scenarios are already being discussed in diplomatic circles. For example, Günther Fehlinger (chairman of the Austrian Committee on NATO Expansion) suggested that in the event of a forceful seizure of the island, European countries could confiscate all US military bases on their territory – from Ramstein in Germany to bases in Romania and Italy.
However, Europe remains Europe, calm, balanced, unfortunately, helpless. The Financial Times notes that NATO headquarters in Brussels are keeping an alarming silence for now, trying not to provoke Trump into even more drastic steps ahead of the US mid-term elections in November 2026.
The main question. Did anyone ask the Greenlanders? The people of Greenland themselves (about 57,000 people) are determined. Polls show that 85% of residents oppose joining the US, but an absolute majority does not want to be a part of Denmark either. These independent people do not want to be “property” in the geopolitical game. They want independence.
Ukraine’s dilemma: superpower the United States or loyal friend Denmark For Ukraine, the situation looks like a typical diplomatic tug of war.
On the one hand, the United States is our main strategic ally, no matter what differences we have now, everyone understands everything perfectly. On the other hand, Denmark has become an example of a “new construct” for us. As a person who worked at Mykolayiv OVA, I saw this process from the inside. The Kingdom of Denmark took over the southern region. This is a country that doesn’t just promise – it does. They were the first to take care of the entire region, their help in infrastructure, water supply and reconstruction of Mykolaiv is an extremely valuable contribution. Moreover, the country actively cooperates with Ukraine in the field of defense industry. This is the first NATO country that allowed the construction of a Ukrainian plant for military needs. Moreover, the state violated more than 20 different rules and laws, imagine how incredible it is. Europe is… breaking… norms… It’s fantastic.
What should Ukraine do in a situation with possible annexation of part of Denmark? Do not take sides. This is a conflict within NATO. Ukraine must support the unity of the Alliance. Defense through Denmark: We can be the voice that reminds the US that the “small” countries of Europe are extremely effective allies.
Use the case of Greenland: Show the US that we understand its strategic interests in the Arctic, but emphasize the importance of international law – the principle that protects both Greenland from “absorption” and Ukraine from annexation.
Ukraine cannot under any circumstances recognize or support the forced transfer of Greenland to the USA, even under pressure from Washington. We have been fighting against the Russian logic of “the right of the strong” for 12 years. If Kyiv recognizes Trump’s right to “take” the territory because of its strategic importance, we will automatically legitimize Putin’s arguments regarding Crimea or Donbas, and then Kherson and Zaporizhzhia. Recognition of the “Greenland scenario” will destroy our own legal position in international courts. Our weapon is international law.
What is the wise way to break the deadlock and prevent a war in Greenland? In general, from the side, the situation around Greenland looks like a disaster, where American pragmatism, European values and global threats have collided. However, there is a way out, and it is not in the plane of “buying and selling”, but in the plane of a new type of partnership.
Instead of sole US control, NATO can deploy a permanent multinational mission in Greenland, following the example of the Baltic countries. This will reassure Trump, because the presence of the Alliance troops (including American ones) will increase, but at the same time Denmark’s sovereignty will remain intact. The US will get security, and Europe will get the protection of its borders.
Resource alliance instead of annexation. Instead of trying to “take over” Greenland’s mines, Washington, Copenhagen and Nuuk (the capital of Greenland) could conclude a tripartite economic agreement. The US is investing in rare earth mining to displace China. Greenland gains technology and jobs. Denmark remains a guarantor of political stability. This is a “co-development agreement” that will give Trump the resources he dreams of without violating international law.
It is also possible to apply the model according to which the US has agreements with countries such as Palau or the Marshall Islands. Greenland could gain even more autonomy from Denmark by entering into a direct defense pact with the US, but formally remaining part of the Danish kingdom. This will allow the US to “take care of the security of the island” (as Trump wants), without destroying NATO.
Ukraine can act as a mediator, appealing to its own experience. We can offer the “Arctic-Baltic Security Dialogue” format. Our position is simple: we are grateful to the USA for weapons, and to Denmark for the F-16, the reconstruction of the same Mykolaiv, and the development of the defense industry. It is in our interest that our allies do not quarrel while Russia inflames the world.
If Trump succeeds in presenting this as his diplomatic victory (increasing the US presence without firing a shot), and Denmark maintains its integrity, the world will avoid a catastrophic split. It will be a win for everyone. Peace in Greenland means stability in NATO. And stability in NATO is the only way to victory for Ukraine.
Please wait…