It is an era of superpower conflict and competition for natural resources. Newly accessible sea routes are transforming the world’s political geography.
The US government eyes a strategically located island territory, currently under the control of the Kingdom of Denmark, which Washington believes is necessary for its national security and economic interests. After first making an offer to buy the territory — one rejected by Copenhagen — the US suggests that it won’t rule out the use of military force to take it. The Danes, in response, grudgingly take the deal.
The year is 1915 and the territory in question is the Danish West Indies, known today as the US Virgin Islands.
In the wake of the sinking of the passenger ship Lusitania by German submarines, President Woodrow Wilson’s administration wanted control of the Caribbean islands out of fear they could be annexed by Germany, and used as a base to attack shipping through the recently opened Panama Canal. That deal – which was finalized in 1917 for $25 million, or a bit less than $600 million in today’s money — was the last major territorial purchase by the United States.
Such territorial acquisitions were a relatively common practice in the age of overseas empires, but are nearly unheard of today.
This musty topic, though, is unexpectedly back in the news, thanks to President-elect Donald Trump’s very public coveting of Greenland: another Danish-administered island.
Trump first publicly discussed the idea of the United States purchasing the world’s largest island back in 2019, during his first term.
The idea was rejected out of hand by the government of Denmark at the time, with Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen saying she “hope[s] that this is not meant seriously.” Trump canceled a visit to Denmark in response.
How serious Trump is now is known to him alone, but he has not let the idea go as he prepares to return to the White House.
In December, in a social media post announcing his pick of PayPal co-founder Ken Howery to serve as ambassador to Denmark, Trump posted, “For purposes of National Security and Freedom throughout the World, the United States of America feels that the ownership and control of Greenland is an absolute necessity.”
The Greenland proposal comes alongside Trump repeated is-he-joking-or-isn’t-he suggestions that Canada be made the “51st state” and demands that Panama return control of the Panama Canal — altogether, an agenda for territorial expansion on a level not seen since the James K. Polk administration in the mid-19th century.
The Republican-led House Foreign Affairs Committee posted on X then deleted a post praising Trump’s plans for Greenland and Panama, writing that it’s “un-American to be afraid of big dreams.”
Things got more serious on Tuesday at a press conference at Mar-a-Lago when Trump refused to rule out using “military or economic coercion” to take Greenland or the canal.
(Canada, it seems, is off the hook for military force but not economic.) Also this past week, the president-elect’s son, Donald Trump Jr., visited Greenland for a brief and heavily-documented stopover.
Now that the president-elect of the United States has refused to rule out military force against a NATO ally in Denmark, European leaders clearly no longer find this funny.
Chancellor Olaf Scholz of Germany posted on X, “Borders must not be moved by force” — the sort of admonition usually used against Russia and China.
Even if we take Trump entirely at his word that he is serious about this and will make it a priority, the acquisition of Greenland is extremely unlikely to happen.
But perhaps inadvertently, Trump has highlighted some thorny issues about geopolitics in a rapidly transforming and geopolitically important Arctic, and the suddenly contested borders of what had seemed like a settled world map.
Greenland’s political status, explained
Greenland, an 836,000-square-mile island mostly covered by ice, has been under Danish rule since the 18th century, except for a period of German occupation during World War II followed by brief US protectorate.
The US benefits from Greenland being under the jurisdiction of a friendly NATO ally:
In 2017, the Danish government blocked an effort by a Chinese mining company to acquire an abandoned military base in Greenland, in part out of a desire to maintain good relations with the US.
Trump’s world of real estate
It’s worth briefly considering just why Trump’s Greenland idea seems so bizarre.
The main reason why the market for national sovereignty isn’t what it used to be is probably that while much of the world’s landmass was once covered by colonial empires, it is now mostly covered by sovereign nation-states, in which citizens have some expectation of sovereignty — which includes the right to not simply be sold off to the highest bidder.
Greenland’s political status makes it something of a holdover in this regard, but that doesn’t mean its people and leaders — who’ve been steadily moving toward greater political independence — will simply acquiesce to being treated as an imperialist bargaining chip.
Conclusion
The risk of treating the world map like a game of Risk, even just in rhetoric, is not merely that it strains relations with US allies. It’s that it could validate territorial claims by US enemies.
FAQs
Q: Why is Trump interested in buying Greenland?
A: Trump has expressed interest in buying Greenland, citing national security and economic interests.
Q: Has Denmark agreed to sell Greenland to the US?
A: No, Denmark has rejected Trump’s offer to buy Greenland.
Q: What is the current political status of Greenland?
A: Greenland is an autonomous territory within the Kingdom of Denmark, with its own parliament and government.
Q: Why is Greenland important to the US?
A: Greenland is strategically located and has significant natural resources, including minerals and oil.
Q: Is it likely that the US will acquire Greenland?
A: No, it is unlikely that the US will acquire Greenland, given the strong opposition from Denmark and the Greenlandic government.