Former President Donald Trump declared that the United States will pursue measures regarding Greenland 'whether they like it or not,' citing concerns over potential Russian and Chinese influence in the Arctic region. The remarks reignite debates over strategic control of the Danish autonomous territory.
- Trump stated the U.S. will take action on Greenland regardless of approval.
- Greenland contains an estimated $1 trillion in rare earth minerals.
- Arctic trade volume is projected to rise from 120 million to 450 million tons by 2035.
- Thule Air Base remains a central U.S. military installation in the Arctic.
- Denmark retains sovereignty over Greenland, complicating unilateral U.S. actions.
- Geopolitical tensions are rising over Arctic resource and security dominance.
During a public address in January 2026, Donald Trump reiterated his long-standing advocacy for U.S. acquisition of Greenland, stating that inaction would allow foreign powers to exploit its strategic value. He emphasized that without immediate American engagement, either Russia or China could establish a foothold on the island, which hosts critical Arctic infrastructure and vast mineral resources. Greenland's geopolitical significance has grown due to its position near key maritime routes and its estimated $1 trillion in untapped rare earth elements. The U.S. Department of Defense has previously assessed that securing access to these resources is vital for national security and technological leadership in the 21st century. While Denmark maintains sovereignty over Greenland, the U.S. currently operates Thule Air Base—home to one of the most advanced early-warning radar systems in the Northern Hemisphere. Trump cited a projected increase in Arctic shipping lanes by 2035, with estimates suggesting Arctic trade volume could reach 450 million tons annually, up from 120 million tons today. He warned that failure to act now would leave the U.S. vulnerable to military and economic encroachment by non-NATO nations operating in the region. The statement has prompted diplomatic concern among Nordic allies and intensified scrutiny of U.S. foreign policy toward Arctic governance. Analysts note that any move to alter Greenland’s status would require complex multilateral negotiations and would face significant legal and political hurdles under international law.