Last month, he reiterated his intention to bring Greenland under “ownership and control” of the US, having previously stated he wanted to buy the island from Denmark in 2019.
The world’s largest island is a place many people do not feel they know much about, but this hotbed of rare minerals has long been seen as strategically vital to the US and, amid a melting Arctic Ocean opening up new shipping lanes, it has become even more of a target, with Trump suggesting it is an “absolute necessity” he acquires it.
Amid all of this, Greenland’s prime minister, Múte Egede, delivered a fiery New Year speech suggesting it was time for the country – which has been a self-governing territory of Denmark since 1979 – to become independent and free itself from the “shackles of colonialism”, after which Trump became more aggressive as world leaders jumped to Greenland’s defence.
READ MORE: Donald Trump wants to buy Greenland. Is Scotland next?
So what does the future look like for this island which is home to around 56,000 people? We spoke to some experts in Arctic politics and law to find out more.
Why does Trump want Greenland?
US interest in Greenland is not new. The country has had a military base on the northwest coast of the island – now called the Pituffik Space Base – since the Second World War and the US has long viewed Greenland’s location as strategically key, as it offers the shortest route between North America and Europe.
Marc Jacobsen (below), an expert in Arctic politics at the Royal Danish Defence College, explained how Trump also has interest in the island because it is abundant with rare earth minerals.
He told the Sunday National: “Greenland’s strategic location is seen as an important element of US national security.
“If Russia were to hit the US with nuclear missiles, the shortest route would be via Greenland so therefore the air base is immensely important.
(Image: Supplied) “The second reason for his interest is natural resources. Rare elements are important in all kinds of technologies from mobile phones to weapons.
“A third reason is Trump’s big ego. It’s about size, it’s about grabbing countries if it’s possible to grab them.”
According to a 2023 survey, 25 of 34 minerals deemed “critical raw materials” by the European Commission were found in Greenland.
How seriously should we take Trump’s comments?
GREENLAND was a Danish colony until 1953 when it was redefined as a district of Denmark. In 1979, it became a self-governing territory – though Denmark still has control over foreign and defence policy. Since 2009, it has had the right to declare independence if Greenlanders vote for it in a referendum.
The US has considered purchasing Greenland from Denmark at least twice, including in 1867 and 1946, and Trump set out his desire to try and do so again in 2019, something which was shot down by the Danish prime minister, Mette Frederiksen.
But Rachael Lorna Johnstone, a part-time professor of law at the University of Greenland, said there was a subtle yet important difference in what Trump (above) said about acquiring Greenland this time around, as he didn’t mention the word “buy”.
Johnstone said: “He said Greenland should be under ownership and control of the US, that’s very different.
“It’s an important and subtle difference because in 2019, there was this idea he could buy Greenland from Denmark and the response clearly from Denmark was it’s not Denmark’s to sell.
“However, this time he talked about ownership and control being an ‘absolute necessity’ for the United States but he did not indicate how they would obtain that ownership and control.
“You can interpret that in him recognising that you can’t buy Greenland, but you can also interpret it as a more aggressive approach.”
READ MORE: John Swinney calls for ‘Northern Ireland-style trigger’ for indyref2
Trump certainly became more aggressive in his language last week when he refused to rule out military or economic action to seize Greenland.
Johnstone, who also works full-time at the University of Akureyri in Iceland, said this is something that should raise alarms bells.
“I think everyone should be alarmed by this statement because it threatens the stability of the international rule of law,” she added.
“If there was use of force by the United States in regard to Greenland, you would be talking about an act of aggression which is a fundamental breach of international law, and between two Nato states and between the United States and the EU.”
Greenland is not a member of the EU but is associated with it as one of the 25 overseas countries and territories of the bloc and so Greenlanders are considered EU citizens.
(Image: Unsplash) Trump’s comments have indeed alarmed world leaders, with both Germany and France warning the president-elect against any attempt to “move borders by force”.
French foreign minister Jean-Noël Barrot said: “There is no question of the EU letting other nations in the world, whoever they may be, attack its sovereign borders.”
Greenland’s politicians have, meanwhile, moved quickly to try to calm the situation as they look to the future.
Will Greenland become independent?
BEFORE Trump became more aggressive in his stance, Egede (below) had suggested in a New Year speech that it was time for Greenland to become independent. An election is set to be held in Greenland before April 6.
The independence movement has gained significant traction in recent years in part due to multiple revelations of misconduct by Danish authorities last century, including a forced contraception campaign in the 1960s and 1970s where Inuit women and girls were fitted with intrauterine devices to prevent pregnancy.
(Image: MADS CLAUS RASMUSSEN/Ritzau Scanpix/AFP via Getty Images) There are no major political parties in Greenland that are against independence and Jacobsen said there is no doubt that if a referendum happened, Greenlanders would very likely vote for self-determination.
“There’s been some detailed surveys showing there’s a strong movement for independence but what they don’t necessarily agree on is what independence means,” he said.
“Does that mean a continuous close relationship to Denmark? Some parties think anything but Denmark is better.”
Johnstone added: “There is a lot more attention being paid to historic abuses, really serious human rights violations in Greenland. There are a lot more people saying ‘we’ve had enough’.”
What would independence mean for Greenland?
WHILE Jacobsen doesn’t believe Trump’s aggression will fuel the desire for independence any further, given it is already strong, he said it has got Greenlanders talking about what the future could look like if the country became independent.
Greenland currently relies heavily on a block grant from Denmark, worth about 600 million euros every year, so there is an acceptance that if the country wishes to keep the same living standards it has now, it will need to diversify its economy.
“The majority [of Greenlanders] say they would like to preserve the society as it is now, so for that they need new investments,” said Jacobsen.
“Therefore, they’re looking into the mining potential in the southern parts of Greenland where there are rare earth elements. They are looking into developing these mines because right now, they only have small-scale mining of ruby and gold.”
READ MORE: Humza Yousaf: Elon Musk is inflaming racial tensions and needs stopped
The need to diversify its economy is perhaps one of the reasons Greenland’s politicians, including minister for statehood and foreign affairs Vivian Motzfeldt, have sought to calm down tensions on the back of Trump’s comments.
She said while the future of Greenland must be decided by Greenlanders, the country is “open to greater international cooperation, including with the United States”.
Johnstone explained Greenland wants to work with other countries, which would be key if it intended to rely less on Denmark.
“It was quite a conciliatory response from Vivian Motzfeldt,” she said.
“They don’t want to antagonise the incoming US president and they do want to work with the United States.
“For many years now, Greenland has been trying to diversify its co-operation and build up other partners, so they are less dependent on Denmark.”