Trump’s Greenland Quest: No Force, Just Demands at Davos – By Dr Harold Gunatillake
Overview: Greenland was a Danish colony until 1953, when it was reorganised as a Danish district. In addition to its own local government, Greenland is represented in the Danish Parliament, the Folketing, by two delegates.
In the 21st century, Donald Trump asserted during his two presidencies that the United States should acquire Greenland. The United States has historically regarded Greenland as strategically crucial for the defence of its mainland, and previous military strategies included Greenland among the territories that the United States would seize and fortify in a hypothetical conflict.
A 2019 survey indicated that 67.8% of Greenlanders favour independence from Denmark within the next two decades. A subsequent 2025 survey revealed that 84% support independence, while 9% oppose it. Additionally, 61% opposed
independence if it entailed a reduction in living standards, whereas 39% supported it.
US President Doubles Down on Greenland Remarks, Criticises Denmark at World Economic Forum
At the 2026 World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, President Donald Trump of the United States revitalised the debate concerning his intentions regarding Greenland. Providing reassurance to international leaders, President Trump emphasised, “I don’t have to use force. I don’t want to use force. I won’t use force,” thereby conclusively denying any speculation that the United States might attempt to acquire Greenland through military intervention.
Trump states that Greenland is crucial for his strategy to construct a Golden Dome defence system, intended to safeguard the United States against missile assaults from Russia and China.
Additionally, he mentions that European allies could collaborate in this effort.
The island possesses extensive, predominantly unexploited reserves of rare-earth minerals, many of which are essential for technologies such as mobile phones and electric vehicles.
Trump has not stated that the United States is pursuing Greenland’s mineral wealth; instead, he indicated that American control over the island “positions all parties favourably, particularly concerning security and mineral resources.”
Despite this assurance, Donald Trump reaffirmed his advocacy for the United States to acquire what he described as “a piece of ice, cold and poorly located.” He criticised Denmark, which presently retains sovereignty over Greenland, characterising the nation as “ungrateful” and referencing American support during World War
- “Denmark capitulated to Germany after merely six hours of combat and was wholly incapable of defending either itself or Greenland. Consequently, the United States was compelled to intervene, and we did so,” Trump asserted. He also questioned the
rationale of restituting sovereignty to Denmark post-war, lamenting, “But we did it, yet we returned it. How ungrateful are they now?”
Trump’s remarks, anticipated to focus on economic matters and affordability, consistently shifted to topics related to European defence and the reluctance of certain European allies to support his Greenland proposal. The president’s discourse was in line with threats made the previous week to impose additional import tariffs on Denmark and seven other allied nations unless they engaged in negotiations over the transfer of Greenland, a semi-autonomous Danish territory.
The renewed emphasis on Greenland has encountered scepticism and opposition from both Danish authorities and the wider international community. Numerous observers perceive the initiative as an extension of former President Trump’s transactional approach to foreign policy, with critics contending that such efforts could jeopardise long-standing alliances. Conversely, President Trump asserts that the acquisition of Greenland is of strategic significance to national security and economic interests, although the specifics remain undisclosed.
As the debate continues, the future of US–Denmark relations and the status of Greenland remain uncertain, with diplomatic tensions simmering beneath the surface of public statements and international forums.
Image Source : britannica.com
