Donald Trump's return to the White House was accompanied, among other things, by a series of foreign policy statements as sensational as they were controversial, which quickly grabbed the headlines of the global media. From the issues related to the Panama Canal, to Canada, to Greenland, every word sparked international debate.
In this article we will focus on the statements regarding Greenland, in order to understand the economic, political and geostrategic arguments that motivate what for many seems to be the classic provocation of "The Donald". For those who closely observe the global geopolitical balances, however, this story takes on a very different relevance, rooted in the recent history of relations between the United States, Denmark and the Arctic island.
The first historic attempt by the United States to purchase Greenland dates back to 1867, under the administration of Andrew Johnson, shortly after the acquisition of Alaska. The idea did not materialize, but American interest emerged again during World War II. After the Nazi invasion of Denmark in 1940, the United States took a crucial role in the defense of Greenland, establishing the Thule Air Base (now Pituffik Space Base). In 1946, Harry Truman offered the Kingdom of Denmark $100 million to complete the purchase of the island, but the Danish government firmly refused, eventually ending its status as a colony in 1953 and integrating the island as part of the Kingdom. In 2009, the island gained a form of semi-autonomous government, with the right to hold a referendum on independence from Denmark.
Coming to the present day, in 2019, the first Trump administration had already attempted to revive the purchase proposal, but with little media success. On December 22, 2024, not yet formally inaugurated for the second term, the president-elect returned to the charge, declaring in Truth that "for reasons of national security, ownership and control of Greenland is an absolute necessity for the United States of America". Several significant events followed this statement. On January 8, 2025, during a press conference, Trump refused to rule out the use of military or economic force to pursue this goal. On January 14, 2025, the House passed a bill authorizing negotiations with Denmark for the purchase of Greenland. Finally, on January 25, 2025, Trump had a heated phone call with Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen, during which he reportedly exerted strong pressure for the sale of the island.
The reasons for this interest can be summarized in four interconnected points: (1) the geographical position; (2) the defensive and deterrent function; (3) the abundance of critical raw materials underground; (4) the potential impact of melting ice on new shipping routes.
From a geographical point of view, Greenland is the victim of a double misunderstanding: it is not as large as it seems and it is much closer to the United States than to its Danish homeland. As for its size, the cause is the use of the Mercator projection in nautical charts, which induces distortions as one gets closer to the poles: the closer one gets, the more the size of the areas represented increases compared to the real proportion. It is no coincidence that the problem of the incomparability of some geographical dimensions based on modern maps has taken the name of “the Greenland problem”. On the maps, in fact, Greenland appears to be the same size as the African continent, but in reality its land mass is 14 times (!) smaller. As for distances, the capital, Nuuk, is less than 3.000 km from New York and almost 3.500 km from Copenhagen, motivating Washington's geostrategic interest in the island. This geographical interest finds its main expression in the “GIUK gap”, that is the double maritime gap composed of the portions of sea included in a straight line between Greenland (G), Iceland (I) and the United Kingdom (UK). This gap offers a containment system for any hostile fleets (such as the Severny flot (Russian) and is the shortest route for supply lines between the United States and its European NATO allies. Finally, the GIUK gap also represents the gateway to the Northwest Passage, a naval route that connects the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans, passing through the Canadian Arctic archipelago.
The geographical position it is accompanied by the defensive and deterrent function that Greenland has assumed in the eyes of Washington since the end of the nineteenth century. The precious defensive role of Greenland, in an anti-Russian function, is demonstrated by the presence inside the Pituffik base of a Upgraded Early Warning Radar, an electronically scanned array radar system that detects and provides assessments of attacks from ballistic missile threats. Lacking resources and means, Denmark has historically outsourced this defensive function to the United States, enjoying collective guarantees within the NATO framework (whose Article 5 also protects Greenland). However, Copenhagen does not seem willing to allow an expansion of the American military presence on the island, while for Washington it is of fundamental importance to strengthen its military bulwark and prevent potential infiltration by the Kremlin.
Furthermore, according to the accompanying note to the Memorandum of Understanding between the European Commission and Greenland signed in 2023, in the subsoil of the island there would be at least 25 out of 34 critical raw materials (CRM), that is, those materials considered essential for industry and the economy, whose criticality is given by the high demand or by the geographical concentration and not by the actual scarcity (unlike rare materials). Most of these materials are subject to very high global demand (think of the requests deriving from the transition from the internal combustion engine to the electric engine) and are of extreme interest to Washington also in light of the dominant position of the People's Republic of China in this sector and the threats coming from Beijing, of a possible restriction on the export of these materials.
Finally, looking to a not too distant future, the The ongoing melting of the ice could revolutionize current shipping routes of the North, introducing new routes that bypass the maritime funnel of the GIUK gap and significantly shorten crossing times. According to the Arctic Council, climate change has increased navigation in the northern hemisphere of the planet by 37% during the summer period. While this news is tragic for most, the main shipping companies are looking at this phenomenon as a new commercial opportunity.
In conclusion, it is most appropriate do not downgrade President Trump's position, however awkward in form and reckless in substance, to a simple boutade. The claims about interest in Greenland, beyond appearances, reflect a strategy that embodies the very essence of power politics of the United States. The superficial reaction of some Italian and European newspapers, which dismissed the issue with derision, highlights once again the poor understanding of the phenomenon of trumpism from this side of the Atlantic. Moreover, the economic, political and geostrategic significance of Greenland has been well known to Washington for some time and makes the island, today more than ever, a crucial pawn in the global chessboard, where ambitions for natural resources are intertwined with control of the Arctic routes, transforming the largest island in the world into a battleground between the great powers.
Photo: US Army / US Space Force / OpenAI
