Listen to the article

0:00
0:00

Former President Donald Trump stirred controversy with an extraordinary message to Norway’s prime minister, making false claims about Greenland’s sovereignty while linking his pursuit of the territory to his failure to win the Nobel Peace Prize.

In his message, Trump claimed there are “no written documents” supporting Denmark’s ownership of Greenland, asserting that Denmark “cannot protect that land from Russia or China.” He suggested Danish claims to the territory were based merely on “a boat landing there hundreds of years ago,” comparing it to American boats that he claimed also landed there.

Experts quickly dismissed Trump’s assertions as factually incorrect. Marc Jacobsen, associate professor at the Royal Danish Defence College and an expert on Arctic security and diplomacy, stated unequivocally: “Donald Trump’s claim is false, again.” Jacobsen noted that Denmark’s sovereignty over Greenland has been repeatedly recognized internationally, particularly by the United States.

Historical records thoroughly contradict Trump’s claims. Nordic vessels began arriving in Greenland centuries before the United States existed as a nation. The settlement that eventually became Nuuk, Greenland’s capital, was established by a Danish-Norwegian missionary in the early 1700s—decades before American independence.

More importantly, numerous written documents explicitly recognize Danish sovereignty over Greenland, many of them bearing American signatures. In 1916, as part of a deal in which Denmark sold the Danish West Indies (now the U.S. Virgin Islands) to the United States, then-Secretary of State Robert Lansing issued a formal declaration acknowledging Danish sovereignty. In this document, Lansing stated that the U.S. government “will not object to the Danish Government extending their political and economic interests to the whole of Greenland.”

When a territorial dispute arose in 1931 after Norway occupied and claimed sovereignty over eastern Greenland, the Permanent Court of International Justice ruled in Denmark’s favor in 1933, confirming Danish sovereignty over the entire territory. The court cited multiple pieces of evidence, including an 1814 treaty in which Denmark ceded Norway to Sweden but explicitly retained Greenland.

During World War II, while Denmark was under Nazi occupation, another agreement between the United States and Denmark granted America broad powers to construct and operate military facilities in Greenland. However, this document repeatedly acknowledged Danish sovereignty, stating: “The Government of the United States of America reiterates its recognition of and respect for the sovereignty of the Kingdom of Denmark over Greenland.”

After NATO’s formation in 1949, the U.S. and Denmark signed an updated agreement that incorporated NATO into their 1941 arrangement. This document again affirmed Danish sovereignty, specifying that U.S. powers in Greenland’s “defense areas” were granted “without prejudice to the sovereignty of the Kingdom of Denmark.”

As recently as during President George W. Bush’s administration, the United States signed an agreement that explicitly noted Danish sovereignty over Greenland. This revised agreement acknowledged Greenland’s evolution “from colony to that of an equal part of the Kingdom of Denmark under the Constitution” and recognized the establishment of “a wide ranging Greenland Home Rule.”

Trump’s interest in acquiring Greenland first made headlines in 2019, when he confirmed reports that he had discussed purchasing the territory, which is rich in natural resources and holds strategic military importance due to its location. Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen called the idea “absurd” at the time, prompting Trump to cancel a planned state visit to Denmark.

The former president’s latest comments revive an issue that had largely faded from public discussion and raise questions about his understanding of international territorial agreements that have been well-established for decades.

Fact Checker

Verify the accuracy of this article using The Disinformation Commission analysis and real-time sources.

14 Comments

  1. This is a good example of why we need rigorous fact-checking, especially around territorial claims and international diplomacy. Misleading statements can have real consequences.

    • Liam Hernandez on

      It’s troubling to see a former president make claims that seem to be at odds with the established historical and diplomatic facts. Fact-checking is crucial to uphold the truth.

  2. John F. Martin on

    Fact-checking is vital to uphold the truth, especially on complex issues like international territorial claims. While these disputes can be nuanced, Trump’s assertions about Greenland seem to be contradicted by the historical record and expert analysis.

    • Elizabeth Miller on

      It’s concerning when public figures make claims that appear to be at odds with established facts. Rigorous fact-checking is crucial to maintaining trust in our leaders and institutions, particularly on sensitive geopolitical matters.

  3. While territorial disputes can be nuanced, Trump’s claims about Greenland seem to be factually incorrect based on the evidence presented. Rigorous fact-checking is vital to maintain trust in our leaders and institutions.

    • It’s concerning to see a former president make assertions that contradict the historical record and international consensus. Fact-checking is crucial to uphold the truth, especially on complex geopolitical issues.

  4. Mary T. Hernandez on

    Greenland’s sovereignty is a complex geopolitical issue, but Trump’s claims appear to be contradicted by the historical record and expert analysis. It’s important to rely on authoritative sources, not unsubstantiated assertions.

    • Fact-checking is essential to counter the spread of misinformation, especially on sensitive international matters. Experts have clearly refuted Trump’s inaccurate statements about Greenland’s status.

  5. John Hernandez on

    Fact-checking is important to ensure we have accurate information, especially on complex geopolitical issues like Greenland’s sovereignty. Trump’s claims seem to contradict the historical record and international consensus.

    • Experts have clearly refuted Trump’s assertions as factually incorrect. It’s concerning when leaders make false claims that could undermine established international agreements.

  6. Emma C. Thomas on

    This article highlights the importance of relying on authoritative sources and expert analysis, rather than unsubstantiated claims, when it comes to international territorial disputes. Fact-checking is essential to maintain public trust.

    • Jennifer H. Jackson on

      Fact-checking is a critical process to counter the spread of misinformation, especially on sensitive geopolitical issues like Greenland’s sovereignty. It’s troubling to see a former president make claims that experts have clearly refuted.

  7. This article underscores the importance of fact-checking, especially when it comes to high-profile political figures making claims about international territorial disputes. Relying on authoritative sources and expert analysis is essential to counter the spread of misinformation.

    • Fact-checking is a vital process to uphold the truth and maintain public trust, particularly on complex geopolitical issues like Greenland’s sovereignty. It’s troubling to see a former president make assertions that experts have clearly refuted.

Leave A Reply

A professional organisation dedicated to combating disinformation through cutting-edge research, advanced monitoring tools, and coordinated response strategies.

Company

Disinformation Commission LLC
30 N Gould ST STE R
Sheridan, WY 82801
USA

© 2026 Disinformation Commission LLC. All rights reserved.