Listen to the article
In a series of recent statements, former President Donald Trump has intensified his focus on Greenland, claiming the United States must take control of the territory for national security reasons—assertions that both Greenland officials and NATO allies have firmly rejected.
Speaking at the World Economic Forum in Davos on Wednesday, Trump characterized acquiring Greenland as “a core national security interest of the United States of America,” doubling down on his previously expressed desire to purchase the self-governing Danish territory.
Later that same day, following discussions with NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte, Trump appeared to moderate his position, stating they had reached “the framework of a future deal” regarding Greenland. He provided no specifics about the alleged agreement.
Trump’s renewed interest in Greenland has been accompanied by several controversial claims about Denmark’s legal rights to the territory, alleged Russian and Chinese military presence in the region, and Denmark’s defense capabilities—many of which do not align with established facts.
In a January 19 text exchange with Norwegian Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Støre, Trump questioned Denmark’s sovereignty over Greenland, writing there are “no written documents” establishing ownership. This claim contradicts historical record.
Multiple written agreements and court rulings establish Denmark’s legal claim to Greenland, including a 1916 declaration by the U.S. Secretary of State explicitly recognizing Danish control. Additionally, an international court ruling in 1933 affirmed Denmark’s sovereignty over the entire island.
Danish colonization of Greenland began in the early 1700s, predating the formation of the United States. Marc Jacobsen, a professor at the Royal Danish Defence College, emphasized this history: “Danish expeditions reached and settled Greenland centuries ago. Since then, Denmark’s sovereignty over Greenland has been internationally recognized, including by the U.S.”
Trump has also repeatedly claimed that “Greenland is covered with Russian and Chinese ships all over the place” and that “there are Russian destroyers… Chinese destroyers… Russian submarines all over the place.” However, these assertions lack supporting evidence.
Greenland’s Minister of Business Naaja Nathanielsen directly contradicted Trump’s characterization, stating she was “not aware” of any Russian or Chinese naval presence around Greenland. Public ship-tracking data from MarineTraffic shows no Russian or Chinese-flagged commercial vessels in the region, with most maritime traffic consisting of fishing boats.
“The claim by President Trump of Russian and Chinese ships all over the place does not hold,” stated Romain Chuffart, managing director of The Arctic Institute, a non-profit think tank. Other experts note that Russian naval activity in the Arctic is primarily concentrated near Norway, while China’s Arctic engagement has focused on trade relationships with Russia and activities near Alaska.
Trump further claimed that Greenland’s defense consists of merely “two dog sleds,” a characterization that significantly understates Denmark’s military presence. While Danish special forces do operate the Sirius Dog Sled Patrol in remote areas, this represents just one element of Denmark’s Arctic security operations.
Denmark maintains Arctic patrol vessels, surveillance aircraft, and a military base in Nuuk with approximately 150 personnel. The Danish government has also committed roughly $6.5 billion to modernize military capabilities in Greenland over the next decade, according to Chuffart.
The United States already maintains Thule Air Base in northern Greenland and has provisions to expand its presence under a 1951 agreement with Denmark. Danish officials have indicated openness to greater U.S. security cooperation in the region while firmly maintaining that Greenland is not for sale.
This renewed focus on Greenland comes amid increasing global attention to Arctic resources and shipping routes as climate change makes the region more accessible and strategically valuable to world powers.
Fact Checker
Verify the accuracy of this article using The Disinformation Commission analysis and real-time sources.
12 Comments
This is a complex geopolitical issue with valid security concerns on all sides. I’m curious to learn more about the framework of any potential deal Trump mentioned regarding Greenland. What would it entail and how would it impact Denmark’s sovereignty?
Agreed, the specifics of any agreement would be important. Greenland’s strategic location means its status is an important matter for regional stability and security.
This dispute over Greenland highlights the need for US foreign policy to be grounded in facts, diplomacy and respect for sovereignty. I hope cooler heads prevail and any discussions on Greenland’s future involve all relevant stakeholders.
While Greenland’s geopolitical significance is undeniable, the US acquisition of the territory against Denmark’s wishes would be a concerning overreach. Greenland’s people and government must have a voice in determining their own future.
Absolutely, Greenland’s right to self-determination should be respected. Any deal needs to prioritize the interests and sovereignty of the Greenlandic people.
The idea of the US acquiring Greenland is provocative, but I’m skeptical of Trump’s justifications. Denmark’s defense capabilities and Greenland’s sovereignty should not be undermined without strong evidence and consensus from all stakeholders.
Trump’s renewed push to acquire Greenland seems more like political posturing than a serious policy proposal. Greenland’s status is a delicate matter that requires thoughtful, multilateral negotiations – not unilateral claims of control.
Agreed. Greenland’s future should be determined through inclusive diplomacy, not unilateral assertions of US interests. Respecting the sovereignty of Denmark and the self-determination of the Greenlandic people is crucial.
While Greenland’s strategic location is undeniable, Trump’s unilateral push to acquire the territory raises serious concerns. Any negotiations should prioritize the self-determination of the Greenlandic people and Denmark’s sovereign rights.
Absolutely. Greenland’s status is a complex geopolitical issue that requires nuanced diplomacy, not unilateral assertions of control.
While Greenland’s geopolitical importance is clear, Trump’s disputed claims and attempts to pressure Denmark raise serious concerns. Any discussions on Greenland’s status must prioritize the interests and rights of its people above all else.
Trump’s claims about alleged Russian and Chinese military presence in Greenland seem dubious and not supported by facts. I hope any discussions around Greenland’s status are grounded in truth and diplomacy, not disputed assertions.