A Geopolitical, Strategic and Political Analysis of Greenland

Greenland is a strategic geography located at the centre of the Arctic region, where great power competition is being reshaped in the 21st century. Global climate change, along with the melting of glaciers, has made the Arctic accessible from an economic, military and geopolitical perspective; this situation has rapidly increased the interest of global actors, primarily the United States (US), the Russian Federation and the People's Republic of China, in the region. This article examines US policies towards Greenland in their historical, geopolitical, military, economic and political dimensions; it comprehensively analyses what the US wants, the reasons behind these objectives, possible scenarios and the short- and long-term consequences of this process on the international system.

1. Why Greenland?

In the literature on international relations, geography has always been a decisive factor in the shaping of power. Alfred Thayer Mahan's theory of sea power and Halford Mackinder's approach to land power demonstrate how geography directs the strategic behaviour of states. While regions such as Central Europe, the Eastern Mediterranean and the Middle East came to the fore during the Cold War, in the 21st century the Arctic region has become one of the new centres of global competition.

Greenland is a key element in this competition due to its central location in the Arctic geography, its natural resources and its military-strategic position. Although the US's interest in Greenland has occasionally been brought to the fore by public statements about ‘purchasing’ it, this interest is neither superficial nor temporary. On the contrary, it is a structural and long-term part of the US's global strategy.

The aim of this study is to examine US policy towards Greenland not only through the lens of current political debates, but also in the context of historical continuity, geopolitical theories and great power competition.

2. Greenland's Geographical and Geopolitical Position

Greenland is the world's largest Arctic island, located in the northeast corner of the North American continent, next to Canada. It has an area of 2,130,800 km², with coastal islands covering 2,175,600 km², and a population of approximately 55,000 (Europe has an area of approximately 10,180,000 km²). Politically, Greenland is part of the Kingdom of Denmark with a certain degree of local autonomy. The island is mostly located within the Arctic Circle, and its northernmost point is 708 km from the North Pole. It is approximately 2,650 km long from north to south and approximately 1,300 km wide from east to west. The island generally rises steeply from the surrounding seas, bays and straits to reach elevations of over 3,000 metres.

The island has a highly rugged coastline with numerous fjords. The eastern coast, despite its great ruggedness, is largely inaccessible due to ice mountains. Greenland's interior, together with its ice sheet, forms a plateau at an altitude of 2,000 to 3,000 metres above sea level. It is estimated that approximately 1,860,900 km² of the island is permanently covered by ice 500 to 1,500 metres thick, with only about 13% of Greenland's surface being ice-free, and this thickness reaching up to 150 metres in the coastal region. The highest peak is Mount Forel, at 3,440 metres. The Greenland Sea is the main connection point between the Arctic and the western Atlantic. It is of great importance for Arctic fishing and whaling. The northern part is mostly covered with ice, while the southern part is covered with icebergs or ice floes.

2.1 Physical Geography and Strategic Location

Greenland is the world's largest island in terms of area and is located northeast of the North American continent, between the Arctic Ocean and the North Atlantic. This location makes Greenland a strategic crossroads for both air and sea transport. In particular, the fact that the shortest air and missile routes between North America and Europe pass over the Arctic increases Greenland's military value.

2.2 The Geopolitical Transformation of the Arctic

Global warming has caused the rapid melting of ice sheets in the Arctic, revealing previously inaccessible sea routes and resource areas. New transport routes, such as the Northern Sea Route and the Northwest Passage, allow for the restructuring of global trade in terms of time and cost. Greenland is at the centre of this new geopolitical order.

3. Historical Background of US–Greenland Relations

3.1 Pre-World War II and Wartime

The US's interest in Greenland materialised during the Second World War. Denmark's occupation by Nazi Germany in 1940 left Greenland defenceless; the US filled this void by establishing a military presence on the island. This period marked the beginning of the US's long-term strategic positioning in Greenland.

3.2 The Cold War Period

Throughout the Cold War, Greenland became a key element of the nuclear deterrence and early warning systems developed by the United States against the Soviet Union. Thule Air Base served as a critical hub for ballistic missile early warning radars and strategic bomber aircraft.

3.3 Post-Cold War Period

Although the strategic importance of the Arctic temporarily diminished with the collapse of the Soviet Union, Russia's resurgence and China's global rise since the 2000s have reignited US interest in Greenland.

4. What Does the US Want in Greenland?

On 23 December 2024, Trump announced on his Truth Social account that he would appoint Ken Howard, one of the founders of PayPal, with whom he had worked during his first term, to the US Embassy in Denmark.

Trump's announcement regarding Howard stated, ‘The United States of America feels that the ownership and control of Greenland is an absolute necessity for purposes of National Security and Freedom throughout the World.’

The US's objectives in Greenland are geared towards strategic control and influence rather than classic colonialism or establishing direct sovereignty. Despite its large land area, the island has a very sparse population and plays a major role in the US and NATO's extensive air defence architecture.

The Trump Administration published the US National Security Strategy in November 2025. The US National Security Strategy for 2025 defines ‘extra-hemispheric rivals’ as a threat to the American continent. China is one of these rivals and perhaps the most important one. Although these issues, which Trump will implement in his next term, are intended to convey what he wants to do to his own people, they also serve as instructions for US institutions and organisations.

In a social media post on 20 January 2026, US President Donald Trump showed Canada, Venezuela and Greenland as US territory.

Trump is seated at the head of a giant map in the Oval Office at the White House. The map shows not only the current US territory, but also Canada, Venezuela and Greenland, all coloured in the colours of the US flag. On the other side of the table, European leaders Meloni, Starmer, Macron, Zelenskiy, Von der Leyen and Rutte, created using artificial intelligence, are depicted as Trump's counterparts.

The US's objectives can be summarised under the following headings:

1. Maintaining military superiority in the Arctic

2. Limiting the influence of Russia and China in the region

3. Secure access to critical natural resources

4. Maintaining global power projection

5. Other partners also taking responsibility for NATO defence and spending

5. Military and Security Dimension

5.1 Missile Defence and Early Warning Systems

The island of Greenland is located exactly halfway between Moscow and Washington in terms of distance, i.e. at the point known as the great circle distance.

The island of Greenland is approximately 3,200 kilometres from both Washington and Moscow. Greenland forms the first link in the US ballistic missile early warning system. Potential nuclear attacks from Russia via the North Pole are first detected by radar systems in Greenland. This makes the island an indispensable part of the United States' nuclear deterrence strategy. At a time when the United States wants to establish its Golden Dome Security Umbrella, it is highly likely that Russia or China would launch hypersonic missiles towards the United States, with these missiles passing over Greenland. Therefore, the primary task of the personnel at Pituffik is to scan the sky to detect approaching air threats.

5.2 NATO and Collective Security

Denmark's membership in NATO legitimises the US military presence in Greenland within the framework of international law and collective security. NATO's increased interest in the Arctic region in recent years has further enhanced Greenland's strategic value within the alliance.

6. Economic and Energy Dimension

6.1 Natural Resource Potential

Greenland has great potential in terms of rare earth elements, oil, natural gas, uranium and various metal reserves. These resources are of critical importance, particularly for the defence industry and high-tech sectors.

Greenland, the world's largest island, is back in the spotlight not only for its massive ice sheet but also for its alleged natural resource wealth hidden beneath it. It is noted that this potential, ranging from critical raw materials (such as lithium and rare earth elements) to valuable metals, and even oil and gas, could play a key role in the energy transition.

The fundamental point emphasised by experts is this: Greenland's ice-free area constitutes less than one-fifth of the island's total surface area. In other words, although the ‘visible’ region is large, the real unknown lies in the vast geography beneath kilometres of ice. This strengthens the possibility that there may be huge resources that have not yet been mapped or verified.

Some assessments by the United States Geological Survey (USGS) suggest that there could be approximately 31 billion barrels of oil equivalent hydrocarbons in the land areas of Northeast Greenland (including ice-covered areas). This amount is equivalent to one-tenth of the proven oil reserves of Venezuela, known as the world's number one oil country with reserves of 303 billion barrels.

This scale on paper is naturally appetising and is thought to indicate a potential that could be a ‘game changer’ in the energy market.

What makes Greenland unique from a geologist's perspective is its complex geological history, stretching back 4 billion years. Some of the world's oldest rocks are found here. There is even talk of unusual formations such as large ‘natural’ (non-meteorite) iron masses. Furthermore, although kimberlite structures capable of carrying diamonds were discovered in the 1970s, it is noted that challenging conditions and costs have prevented this from developing into large-scale mining to date.

Greenland's resource diversity is linked to three major processes that trigger resource formation in geology: mountain building, continental rifting, and volcanic activity. The convergence of these three ‘recipes’ in the same region creates an extraordinary picture in terms of both metals and critical raw materials.

Rare earth elements (REE), seen as the ‘unsung heroes’ of energy transition, are critical in many areas, from wind turbines to electric vehicle motors and high-temperature magnets. Therefore, the supply of REE has become not only an economic but also a geopolitical issue.

Research suggests that some REE deposits buried under the ice in Greenland could be among the largest in the world in terms of volume and could hold significant potential for battery/electronics production. It is claimed that, particularly for rare and strategic elements such as dysprosium and neodymium, the reserves beneath the ice could be large enough to meet more than a quarter of future global demand. The total estimated size for these two elements is considered to be approximately 40 million tonnes.

In addition, graphite is another noteworthy topic. This is because graphite, an important component in the production of lithium batteries, is considered to be an ‘under-researched’ resource in Greenland. In other words, although it is not as widely discussed as rare earth elements, it is thought that there is surprising potential in another critical material for energy conversion.

The most striking part of the table is the dilemma between ‘climate’ and ‘mining.’ It is emphasised that an area the size of Albania has melted in Greenland since 1995 and that this trend could increase if global warming does not slow down rapidly.

As the ice recedes, the possibility of accessing underground resources increases; however, the same process threatens coastal settlements by raising sea levels and putting pressure on nature. On the technology side, it is noted that methods such as ground-penetrating radar can map the bedrock topography beneath up to 2 kilometres of ice more clearly, providing clues about potential mining sites.

Nevertheless, exploration beneath the ice is progressing slowly. ‘Extraction’ is an even bigger question mark: not only discoverability, but also the environmental impact of extraction and long-term sustainability are at the centre of the debate.

6.2 US–China Economic Competition

The US is largely dependent on China for rare earth elements. Potential reserves in Greenland are seen as a strategic alternative that could reduce this dependence for the US.

7. China's Arctic and Greenland Policy

China defines itself as a ‘state close to the Arctic’ and is making scientific, economic and diplomatic investments in the region. China, which is interested in port, mining and infrastructure projects in Greenland, is perceived by the US as a long-term strategic rival. In 2014, French Total, Chinese companies filled the void left when Western energy companies such as the US's ExxonMobil and Norway's Statoil withdrew from Russian energy and infrastructure projects in the Arctic, citing Russia's annexation of Crimea. The 2015 Chinese National Security Law defines the polar regions as a security sub-area where China will peacefully protect its interests. Influenced by this new security definition, in September 2015, China sent a fleet of five warships to the Arctic Ocean, approaching within 12 miles of the Alaskan coastline, convincing the US that China's military power was moving into the Arctic.

China's investment efforts were not limited to Greenland.

The ‘China Arctic Corridor’ Project, which aimed to extend from the Port of Kirkenes in Norway to European markets via Helsinki and Tallinn, was also announced in 2019. However, this project, which could make Norway the Singapore of Europe in the ice-free future of the Arctic, could not get started due to pressure from the United States.

8. Russia's Arctic Strategy

The Russian Federation's (RF) Arctic policy and strategy emerged chronologically in four stages.

The first stage took place in the context of the conditions that emerged after the Cold War. During this period, the RF sought to build its Arctic policy through regional and international cooperation mechanisms.

The second phase, beginning in the 2000s, encompasses the coordination process of the RF's policies towards the Arctic region. In this phase, the RF made its socio-economic interests in the Arctic region a matter of national security.

The third phase began to manifest itself with the geopolitical transformation that emerged after the RF's annexation of Crimea. During this process, due to its problems with the West, the RF began to adopt an approach that prioritised the Eastern hemisphere in its foreign policy. It is possible to say that the RF's Arctic strategy matured during this period and thus began to contain complementarity and continuity.

The fourth stage developed in response to the new international conditions that emerged after 2020. During this process, the RF reinforced its geo-economic and geostrategic interests in the Arctic region. New cooperation mechanisms were established with China, particularly in the fields of transport and energy. Initiatives such as the Polar Silk Road demonstrate the geo-economic and geostrategic scope of these mechanisms.

The Russian Federation views the Arctic as a fundamental element of its national security. The reactivation of military bases dating back to the Soviet era and the construction of new bases have increased military competition in the Arctic. The US presence in Greenland directly counterbalances Russia's strategy.

9. Denmark–Greenland Relations and Domestic Politics

Greenland is an autonomous region of the Kingdom of Denmark. However, in recent years, demands for independence in Greenland have been growing. The US's interest in Greenland also indirectly affects these internal political debates. For Denmark, losing this Arctic region, which is strategically located between Europe and North America and is of vital importance for the US ballistic missile defence system, would mean losing its geopolitical significance. However, if Greenlanders choose independence or make their own agreements with the US, Denmark's efforts may prove futile.

It is a fact that the defence agreement signed between the US and Denmark in 1951 grants Washington the right to establish military bases and deploy personnel in Greenland, as well as the authority to control air and sea traffic over the island. According to the NYT, the agreement also gives the US considerable leeway in the construction and operation of military facilities.

The agreement, updated in 2004, gives Greenland's semi-autonomous government a say, while also requiring the US to consult with Denmark and Greenland on its military actions.

Today, the issue goes beyond Denmark's national interests. European allies have sided with Denmark not only out of solidarity but also out of concern that relinquishing Greenland could set a dangerous precedent, encouraging other powers to make territorial claims against small nations. Emphasising international law, Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen and Greenlandic Prime Minister Jens-Frederik Nielsen stated, ‘National borders and the sovereignty of states are based on international law. You cannot annex another country. Greenland belongs to the Greenlanders.’

10. Possible Scenarios

10.1 Continuation of the Status Quo

The most likely scenario is that the US will maintain the current situation by increasing its military presence but without changing Greenland's legal status.

10.2 Greenland's Independence

An independent Greenland could establish closer military and economic ties with the US. This could have significant geopolitical consequences for Denmark and the European Union.

10.3 Military Escalation in the Arctic

The intensification of competition between major powers could transform the Arctic into a new arena for low-intensity conflict.

11. Political Consequences

The United States' policy on Greenland occasionally causes diplomatic tensions in transatlantic relations. It also profoundly affects discussions on Arctic governance and international law.

12. Strategic Consequences

The US National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) has determined that Greenland's glaciers lost 270 billion metric tonnes of water per year between 2002 and 2023.

• Greenland's position is crucial in the ‘sharing’ war in the Arctic.
• In polar geopolitics, Greenland, a melting iceberg, is ‘tempting’ Trump.
• A bill granting Trump ‘authority to negotiate the purchase of Greenland’ was submitted to the House of Representatives.
• Denmark suggested that Trump increase the US military presence on the island instead of buying Greenland.

As Arctic ice melts due to global warming, new trade routes opening up in the region have created a new arena for regional competition between the US, Russia and China, whose interest in the region has grown in recent years.

The Arctic Council's report states that maritime transport in the region has increased by 37 per cent over the last 10 years and that 1,782 ships used these routes in 2024.

The report emphasises that changes in the marine environment, such as the reduction in the size of ice sheets and the melting of old ice, have created longer navigation seasons and significant opportunities for new access to previously inaccessible areas of the Arctic.

The struggle for control over Greenland is an important part of the United States' global power projection. Military superiority in the region strengthens the United States' nuclear deterrence capacity.

13. International Law and Sovereignty Debates

Discourses such as land acquisition pose serious legitimacy issues in terms of modern international law. This situation brings the principles of state sovereignty and self-determination back to the agenda.

14. Conclusion

With the National Security Strategy Document adopted in 2025, the US has decided to relinquish control over some of the areas it controls around the world. It is therefore seeking to reduce the number of regions it defends.

In line with this new strategy, the US no longer wishes to bear much responsibility for ensuring the security of NATO and Europe in particular. It has begun to emphasise that the main responsibility for Europe's defence should be borne by all NATO countries, primarily Germany, France and the UK.

The position taken by the US in the Ukraine-Russia war clearly illustrates this situation. Trump has repeatedly stated that the defence costs of NATO should be shared by all member countries, rather than the US, especially from the perspective of European countries.

This has unsettled the European bloc within the NATO alliance. In fact, the reaction to Trump's statements regarding the need to acquire Greenland has sparked opposition to the United States within NATO.

However, a careful reading of the United States' 2025 National Security Strategy Document reveals that this situation will not lead to a complete split within NATO and that the United States will prioritise its own interests on certain issues.

Furthermore, the fact that this document states that Europe will continue to be of vital strategic and cultural importance to the US is significant in that it indicates that NATO defence expenditure costs will be shared in greater amounts by member countries.

In light of these developments, it is certain that the European Alliance, led by Germany, France and the UK, will first make a sharp turn in its own defence and security policies. To this end, the European Union (EU) has established and implemented the Security Action for Europe (SAFE) programme, designed to increase defence capabilities and ensure joint procurement. EU countries have approved and implemented the new ‘SAFE’ regulation, which aims to increase priority defence production across the bloc, with a budget of €150 billion. ‘SAFE’ programme, which aims to increase priority defence production across the bloc.

Secondly, Ukraine will have to make certain concessions to Russia. This reality, which the US has frequently emphasised at various times, justifies the need for Europeans to ensure Europe's security themselves.

Thirdly, the joint blocking of China by European Arctic states, particularly in the Arctic region, is expected to happen as soon as possible, as it will create a common interest alliance with the US. This may result in the shelving of important projects planned by the Chinese state in Europe and across Europe.

Fourthly, China and Russia's presence and settlements in South America, particularly in Venezuela and Cuba, will be blocked. The first step in this direction was taken by the US on 3 January 2026 with the arrest of Venezuelan leader Maduro and his wife.

Finally, the US-European alliance currently appears to be necessary for the defence of the US. The US-led defence umbrella that emerged in Europe after the Second World War continues to this day. However, it is also true that efforts to strengthen the military capabilities of European countries so that they can defend themselves without the US in the future will take a long time and require enormous costs and manpower.

Greenland is one of the rising geopolitical centres of the 21st century. The US policy towards Greenland should be considered not only in the context of bilateral relations but also within the general dynamics of global power competition. In the coming years, Greenland will continue to influence the future of the international system along with the fate of the Arctic.

15. Assessment from the Perspective of Turkey and Medium-Sized States

The balance of power in the Arctic is influencing NATO's overall strategic orientation. This situation could have indirect but significant consequences for medium-sized NATO members such as Turkey.

The most important issue in Europe's defence is the reality that there will be sufficient equipment and materials, along with soldiers and trained personnel. Europe, which has relied on the US for years, is now striving to return to its former defence capabilities and is seriously considering how to defend itself against a potential power such as Russia without the US.

Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan has stated that his country's defence industry sector is ready to contribute to strengthening the EU's defence industry and security. During a teleconference between the President of the European Council and the EU's partner countries, Erdoğan said: "We believe that planning all steps towards ensuring European security together with Turkey is in line with our common interests. In all these efforts, it is undoubtedly important to preserve transatlantic ties to the maximum extent and to receive the strong support of our ally, America. Our defence industry, with its advanced technology, is ready to contribute to Europe's strengthening defence sector.‘ He added, ’Furthermore, I believe that European defence industry programmes should be open to all of Europe's allies within the framework of the Union. It is also important for us to participate in the EU's programmes for the reconstruction and recovery of Ukraine."

Erdoğan said, ‘Acting with a view to the long-term strategic future of Turkey-EU relations is in the interests of both sides. We remain steadfastly committed to our goal of full membership. We expect the EU to adopt a strategic and forward-looking stance and, therefore, to resume our accession negotiations as soon as possible.’

On the other hand, the fact that Turkey, a NATO member, is experiencing problems in procuring the aircraft and weapon systems it needs, is unable to trade amicably with neighbouring countries, and is surrounded by ongoing wars and constant new unrest clearly demonstrates how fragile this issue is for Turkey.

Europe, which is experiencing problems in energy, natural resources and trade, also faces challenges in the military sphere, which appears likely to seriously affect Europe's defence in the future. The day may not be far off when Europe will want to see Turkey by its side at all times.

For these and similar reasons, Turkey must continue with the same seriousness the steps it has taken in the past to strengthen its defence and defence industry in order to increase its defence and military power. It must work with all its might to realise its major projects in the commercial, military, agricultural, energy, transport, education and economic fields, which are ongoing in land, sea and air defence, without external dependence, together with its neighbouring countries, in the shortest possible time, in order to maintain internal and external peace.

Furthermore, it must strive to achieve the highest level of preparedness to protect its country, its people and its allies in the event of sudden defence and security issues that may arise within its borders or among its allies, including potential disasters that may be experienced by its allies, groups or partnerships.