Why is the USA Obsessed with Greenland?

Rex Ballard
1 day ago
6 min read

A Strategic Imperative in the Arctic

In the early days of his second term, President Donald Trump has reignited a geopolitical firestorm by expressing intense interest in acquiring greater control over Greenland, the world's largest island and an autonomous territory of Denmark. As of January 7, 2026, the White House has confirmed that the administration is actively exploring "a range of options" to secure influence over the territory, including an outright purchase, the possible use of military force, or—most notably—a Compact of Free Association (COFA) agreement. This proposal, which would grant the U.S. extensive military and economic access while allowing Greenland to retain sovereignty, represents a pragmatic pivot from Trump's more bombastic rhetoric during his first term, when he famously suggested buying the island outright. However, underlying this diplomatic overture is a clear strategic calculus: bolstering U.S. military presence in the Arctic to safeguard the Northern Hemisphere against escalating threats from Russia and China.

Historical Context: From Whim to National Security Priority

Trump's fascination with Greenland dates back to 2019, when he first floated the idea of purchasing it from Denmark, dismissing Danish objections as "nasty" and canceling a state visit in response. At the time, the proposal was met with ridicule and dismissed as a real estate tycoon's eccentricity. But in his second administration, the pursuit has taken on a more serious tone, framed explicitly as a matter of national security. Greenland's vast ice-covered expanse, melting due to climate change, holds immense strategic value: access to rare earth minerals essential for defense technologies, control over emerging Arctic shipping routes, and a prime vantage point for monitoring ballistic missile threats.

The U.S. already maintains a foothold through the Pituffik Space Base (formerly Thule Air Base) in northwestern Greenland, a Cold War-era installation critical for missile early warning and space surveillance. This base sits beneath the polar trajectories of Russian intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) targeting North America, allowing for detection at their apogee—the highest point in flight—enhancing the effectiveness of Trump's proposed "Golden Dome" missile shield initiative. Yet, administration officials argue that current arrangements under Danish oversight are insufficient amid growing great-power competition in the Arctic.

The COFA Proposal: A Path to Influence Without Annexation

Reports indicate that the Trump administration is seriously considering proposing a COFA to Greenland, potentially as a precursor to or alternative for full independence from Denmark. Modeled after existing agreements with Pacific nations like the Federated States of Micronesia, the Marshall Islands, and Palau, a COFA would delegate defense responsibilities to the U.S., provide economic aid, and allow unrestricted military operations in exchange for Greenland's sovereignty and duty-free trade. Greenlandic citizens could gain visa-free access to live and work in the U.S., while Washington secures basing rights.

This approach has been discussed internally since May 2025, with some advisors viewing it as a cost-effective way to expand U.S. influence without the political fallout of annexation. Greenlandic opposition MP Kuno Fencker has expressed openness to such a deal, emphasizing diversification of the island's economy beyond Danish subsidies. However, formal proposals have yet to be tabled, and Greenland's Prime Minister Jens-Frederik Nielsen has firmly rejected any notion of "annexation fantasies," insisting the territory is "not for sale." Denmark has echoed this, offering to expand U.S. military presence under existing agreements but warning that coercive moves could fracture NATO.

Trumps Real Objective: Fortifying the Northern Hemisphere Against Russian and Chinese Predation

While the administration publicly emphasizes diplomacy and "dealmaking," the endgame appears to be establishing additional military installations across Greenland to dominate the Arctic frontier. This would extend beyond Pituffik to include new radar sites, airfields, future Golden Dome installations and naval facilities, securing sea lanes like the Northwest Passage and the GIUK Gap (Greenland-Iceland-UK), which are increasingly vital as ice melt opens new routes. Russia has ramped up Arctic militarization, with submarine patrols and bases threatening transatlantic supply lines, while China—declaring itself a "near-Arctic state"—is deploying ballistic missile submarines (SSBNs) in the region, potentially using ice cover for stealthy strikes on North America.

Image shows the flight path of Russian ICBMs to stike the USA - Directly over Greenland

A COFA would enable the U.S. to deny adversaries access, monitor submarine movements, and extract minerals like rare earths, reducing dependence on Chinese supplies. Critics argue this is overreach, but proponents see it as essential for hemispheric defense, countering Russian aggression in Ukraine and Chinese expansionism in the Pacific.

An Extension of Trump's Revitalized Monroe Doctrine

This Greenland gambit is a clear manifestation of Trump's "revitalized" Monroe Doctrine—rebranded by some as the "Donroe Doctrine"—which asserts U.S. dominance in the Western Hemisphere to exclude foreign influences. Originally proclaimed in 1823 to warn European powers against meddling in the Americas, Trump invoked it explicitly during the January 3, 2026, U.S. military operation that ousted Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro. In a swift raid on Caracas, U.S. forces captured Maduro and his wife, installing a transitional government and assuming temporary administration of Venezuela's oil-rich economy. Trump justified the action as expelling Russian, Chinese, and Iranian "predators" from the hemisphere, echoing Monroe's principles but with a unilateral, interventionist twist.

Extending this doctrine northward to Greenland represents a bold expansion, treating the Arctic as part of America's "backyard." Just as Venezuela's intervention targeted resource control and adversary exclusion, a Greenland COFA would preempt Russian bases or Chinese mining investments, securing the Northern Hemisphere's flanks. European allies, including France, Germany, Italy, Poland, Spain, the UK, and Denmark, have condemned this as a violation of sovereignty, warning it could unravel NATO if military options are pursued.

International Backlash and the Road Ahead

Greenland's 57,000 residents, predominantly Inuit, show mixed reaction to the US interest, with polls showing 45% viewing US interest as a threat and 43% seeing it as an opportunity (the balance undecided). Denmark has requested urgent talks with Secretary of State Marco Rubio, while NATO allies rally in defense of Article 5 collective security. China and Russia have decried the moves as "imperialistic," potentially accelerating their own Arctic ambitions.

If the COFA proposal advances, it could mark a new era of U.S. hemispheric security, but at the risk of alienating allies, the United Nations and escalating tensions with Russia and China. Trump's deal making prowess will be tested: can he secure Arctic dominance without igniting a broader conflict? As the ice melts, the stakes only rise.