President Donald Trump has once again done the unthinkable: he spoke a strategic truth the establishment refuses to hear. Declaring that he “doesn’t rule out” military force to annex Greenland, the POTUS turned what others would whisper in Pentagon corridors into a national headline. Strip away the media outrage, and what remains is a coherent geopolitical instinct.
An Old American Impulse
U.S. interest over Greenland is not new. Secretary of State William Seward, fresh from buying Alaska in 1867, made overtures toward Greenland. He envisioned a broader American arc across the North, linking the Pacific to the Atlantic through a northern corridor of American influence. In the late 1860s, Seward initiated informal discussions about acquiring both Greenland and Iceland, seeing their value as coaling stations, naval outposts, and trade nodes essential for an emerging American maritime empire. His vision, often derided as “Seward’s Folly” in reference to the Alaska purchase, was actually part of a larger strategic blueprint—one that stretched the U.S. sphere of influence into the Arctic and beyond. Though Congress was not ready to endorse such a bold move at the time, the idea lingered in the corridors of American foreign policy. Seward’s failed attempts set the stage for an unfinished vision of Arctic control—one that would resurface in later years as geopolitical pressures grew, particularly as the world’s attention shifted toward the strategic value of the Arctic in the 20th century.
The Cold War Reappraisal
President Richard Nixon, during the Cold War’s deep freeze, instructed aides to explore purchase options for Greenland, seeing it as a critical outpost in the face of Soviet expansion. In 1946, under President Harry Truman but in a climate President Nixon would later inherit and amplify, the U.S. had already offered $100 million to Denmark for Greenland—an offer that set the precedent for future negotiations. Nixon’s administration revisited the strategic logic amid the Soviet naval buildup in the Arctic and the growing importance of early-warning systems and missile defense. Internal memos from the State Department and Pentagon from the late 1960s (Kissinger) and early 1970s (Schlesinger), now declassified, suggest political interest in securing permanent control over Greenland: The discussions were framed by the escalating Cold War tensions, with Greenland seen as a linchpin for countering Soviet nuclear capabilities and ensuring U.S. strategic dominance in the North Atlantic. Today, the strategic implications have remained largely unchanged, with the added dimension of China’s growing influence in the Arctic complicating the geopolitical calculus.
Trump and the Pentagon’s Quiet Agreement
In 2019, President Trump’s first offer to purchase Greenland was met with Danish indignation and European mockery. However, beneath the headlines, Washington’s national security establishment quietly aligned with his strategic instincts. The U.S. Department of Defense had already signaled a shift in its Arctic posture. In 2019, the Pentagon released a new Arctic Strategy that emphasized increased competition with China and Russia, citing newly-opening maritime routes and focusing on enhancing military capabilities in the region.
This strategic pivot was further underscored by the establishment of the Office of Arctic and Global Resilience within the Department of Defense in 2022, highlighting the region’s growing importance to U.S. national security. Later, the Pentagon's 2024 Revised Arctic Strategy, released in July 2024, outlined steps to ensure the Arctic remains a secure and stable region, emphasizing the need for enhanced military presence and modernization of infrastructure.
Central to this strategy is Pituffik Space Base (formerly Thule Air Base), located in northwestern Greenland. The base serves as a critical node in the U.S. missile warning system and space surveillance network, providing early-warning radar capabilities and supporting space situational awareness. In recent years, the U.S. has invested in modernizing the base’s infrastructure and expanding its operational capabilities to counter emerging threats from adversaries in the Arctic region.
Thus, while President Trump’s public statements may have been controversial, they mirrored a broader, bipartisan consensus within the U.S. defense establishment regarding the strategic importance of Greenland and the Arctic.
Greenland’s Strategic Geography
Greenland is not just a snow-covered wasteland but a pivotal chess square in the new great game for the Arctic. It sits astride the GIUK gap—Greenland, Iceland, United Kingdom—a strategic maritime bottleneck vital to NATO. Pituffik is the U.S.’s northernmost installation. Built as Thule Air Base during World War II as part of a secret agreement with Denmark—then under German occupation—the base was later expanded dramatically during the early Cold War to track Soviet ICBMs and serve as a refueling stop for nuclear bombers. Pituffik hosts several advanced systems, such as the AN/FPS-132 Upgraded Early Warning Radar (UEWR), a solid-state phased-array radar system capable of detecting and tracking ballistic missiles and space debris over vast distances. It is part of the U.S. Space Force’s global missile warning network; and the Pituffik Tracking Station (Detachment 1), operated by the 23rd Space Operations Squadron, to track and command high-priority government satellites, making it the northernmost station in the U.S. Satellite Control Network.
The Importance of Greenland to U.S. Power
Beyond missile defense, Greenland offers the U.S. critical leverage over the increasingly navigable Arctic. As ice melts and new shipping lanes emerge, control over Greenland’s coastline allows Washington to project power across the Arctic Ocean, monitor traffic along the Northern Sea Route, and constrain Russian and Chinese naval activity. Its mineral wealth—rare earth elements, uranium, and strategic metals—is increasingly essential to U.S. efforts to diversify supply chains away from China. Greenland also enhances America’s geospatial advantage, offering basing options for hypersonic and ISR platforms in the High North and supporting U.S. space and satellite operations. In strategic terms, it is the unsinkable aircraft carrier of the Arctic.
Protectorate in All but Name
The U.S.-Denmark Defense Agreement of 1951 which formalized the American military presence, effectively transformed Greenland into a U.S. strategic asset under nominal Danish sovereignty. That is, Greenland has long functioned as a U.S. protectorate. Its external security is guaranteed by the United States, its most important economic and logistical partner. Danish sovereignty persists, but under strategic conditions largely defined in Washington.
Meanwhile, internal political currents on the island are shifting. In March 2025, the pro-business Demokraatit party won the largest share of seats in Greenland’s parliament, championing a platform of economic diversification and eventual independence. Prime Minister Jens-Frederik Nielsen has indicated that a referendum on independence is under consideration—though no date has been announced. The movement builds on the 2008 self-rule referendum that expanded Greenland’s autonomy and recognized its people as a distinct nation under international law.
Strategic Logic vs. Respectability Politics
The Arctic contest is intensifying. China is already investing heavily in the Arctic periphery, from Russian gas fields to Icelandic infrastructure. Russia has reopened old Soviet bases and expanded its nuclear sub presence in northern waters. In this light, Greenland is no longer an icy outpost but an Arctic Gibraltar.
Trump’s tone may rile polite society, but his instincts are prescient. The Arctic is becoming the next theater of strategic competition, and Greenland is its front-row seat. Denmark may control it on paper, but the long arc of geopolitics favors powers willing to assert their interests.
The idea of annexation by force remains far-fetched, but the strategic logic behind asserting influence in Greenland is sound. Mock Trump all you like—but in the coming contest for the Arctic, it’s his map everyone will be using.
Bepi Pezzulli is a Solicitor of the Senior Courts of England and Wales specializing in Governance as well as a Councillor of the Great British PAC. He tweets at @bepipezzulli.
Image generated by AI.
Source link