Because Greenland is in a unique geopolitical situation: the 21st century mirror of US resources and influence

Greenland has returned to the center of global geopolitical attention after US President Donald Trump reiterated that the world’s largest island is “fundamental to national security” and may even “have to choose between Greenland and NATO”. The USA’s interest in a hostile territory between the Arctic and the Atlantic and almost uninhabited (it has just 57,000 inhabitants) is due to a series of geographical, geological and geopolitical factors that make Greenland an almost unique case in the contemporary world scene. It is in fact an autonomous but not independent territory (it is part of the Kingdom of Denmark), rich in precious mineral resources and rare earths that are difficult to extract both economically and politically, which however would allow the United States to have long-term strategic advantages especially over China and Russia. Not to mention the position that allows you to control military routes and trade flows. Trump has talked about the possibility of “annexing” or “buying” Greenland, but his real aim is to have influence over that territory rather than conquer or formally own it.

Mineral resources in Greenland

Some of the oldest rocks on the planet are found in Greenland, and it is crossed by magmatic and sedimentary complexes that represent a sort of “archive” of the deep history of the Earth. In this geological context we find considerable mineral wealth: rare earths, graphite, nickel, cobalt, copper, zinc and gold, materials of industrial utility or fundamental for the energy transition and for advanced electronics.

This mineral potential, however, is difficult to extract: Greenland is in fact a fragile territory from the point of view of ecosystems and for this reason mining exploitation can create enormous environmental and social risks.

Belonging to the Kingdom of Denmark: politics

We therefore understand an initial interest not only of the USA, but also of other superpowers such as China, in the control of Greenland’s resources. However, the issue is complicated by the fact that Greenland is not an independent state, so it cannot be negotiated directly. It is an autonomous territory that belongs to the Kingdom of Denmark with regards to defense and foreign policy, which are the two main areas of geopolitical dialogue. Although Greenlanders have an enshrined right to self-determination (established by Self-Government Act of 2009), and there are also independentist currents in its parliament, at the moment Greenland does not have the economic independence to become a sovereign state (about half of its economic needs are provided directly by Denmark through financing).

What does “the US wants Greenland” mean?

Greenland represents one of the few areas in the Western world with significant underexploited mineral potential. A potential, among other things, linked to some raw materials (such as rare earths) whose supply chain is currently largely concentrated in China. For Washington this is not only an economic problem, but also – as declared by Trump himself – national security. In short, what is attractive to the United States is not only Greenland’s mineral resources, but what this territory represents in perspective for the USA: the possibility of dismantling the Chinese “quasi-monopoly” on the sources of supply of rare earths and other resources in which Greenland is rich.

Then there is the question of the Arctic routes, which with global warming are also becoming navigable for increasingly longer periods of the year. From this point of view, Greenland’s position is strategic for monitoring and navigating communication, commercial and even military routes.

The military question is closely linked to the geographical one and is certainly not of secondary importance for the United States, which also already has bases on the island. To date, the US military presence in Greenland is concentrated in the Pituffik Space Base, which is not only a military airport but a crucial hub for the missile warning system, satellite tracking and surveillance of the Arctic space.

For all these reasons, when we say that “the United States wants Greenland” we mean it in a subtle and modern sense: making sure we have influence on that territory to gain a strategic advantage over rival powers: for the US administration it is essential to prevent the island from becoming economically dependent on actors potentially hostile to the US who could control Greenland’s critical infrastructure and resources to their advantage.

We therefore now understand the unique position of Greenland, a territory not huge but with enormous strategic importance, which must make decisions as a great power without having the political and economic means. In a sense, Greenland is the place where we can watch some of the key geopolitical dynamics of this century unfold in real time: the energy transition that requires new raw materials, climate change that redraws maps, geopolitics that returns to being based on geography.

What Trump can do concretely

From a practical point of view, what the United States can actually do now is play for political influence. “Buying” Greenland is practically out of the question, both because of the aforementioned Self-Government Act and because its government has repeatedly declared that “Greenland is not for sale”.

Of course, the inhabitants of the island can decide their own destiny, including complete independence from Denmark or entering into an association with another country, such as the USA, in exchange for economic support. Any decision will still have to go through a popular referendum, approval by the local parliament and the consent of the Danish parliament.

Thus discarding the hypothesis of purchase, but also of annexation through the use of military force (both the USA and Denmark are NATO members), Trump can increase the influence of the USA on Greenland through the so-called soft powerthat is – in simple terms – economic or political agreements. For example, by financing local mining projects or by proposing a commitment to the defense of the territory and economic aid in exchange for rights to exploit the territory and the resources it contains.

Greenland's geopolitical importance belongs to Denmark and NATO base