The President of the United States, Donald Trump, once stated that, for national security reasons, the United States must purchase or have possession of Greenland before Russia or the Chinese Communist Party solidify their interests in the region.
Greenland, a Danish autonomous territory, spans several crucial maritime routes, including the Arctic shipping lanes. Additionally, the island is rich in key minerals and rare earth resources.
President Trump has expressed that Greenland will soon belong to the United States, whether they like it or not. Possible scenarios include Greenland becoming a U.S. territory similar to the U.S. Virgin Islands, or becoming a member country with a free association agreement with the United States.
The United States has signed similar agreements with Micronesia, the Marshall Islands, and Palau. While providing significant economic assistance to these regions, the U.S. also maintains security and defense jurisdiction over them.
In 2019, President Trump first expressed his intention to purchase Greenland, and the second term of the Trump administration is even more eager to include this world’s largest island into the U.S. territory.
On January 14, 2026, Vice President JD Vance and Secretary of State Marco Rubio met with Danish and Greenlandic officials. Following the meeting, Danish Foreign Minister Lars Lokke Rasmussen described the talks as “frank and constructive,” while noting that there are still disagreements between the two sides.
The Trump administration is also supporting mining projects in Greenland, focusing on the island’s rare earth resources.
Greenland’s area is nearly 50% larger than Alaska, three times the size of Texas. If included in the U.S. territory, it would be the largest territorial expansion in U.S. history.
President Trump has long expressed concerns about Russian and Chinese activities in the Greenland region.
In 2007, Russia planted the Russian flag on the seabed of the Arctic Ocean. Since then, Russia has restored over fifty military facilities from the Soviet era. Currently, Russia has six military bases, ten radar stations, fourteen airports, and sixteen deepwater ports in the Arctic region.
Russian President Vladimir Putin stated in November 2025: “It is crucial to strengthen Russia’s position in the Arctic, develop our logistical capabilities comprehensively, and ensure the construction of the Arctic transportation corridor from St. Petersburg to Vladivostok.”
According to a report titled “Arctic Icebreaker Fleets: The Great Gap” released by the Atlas Institute for International Affairs in London on August 4, 2025, Russia possesses more icebreakers, including nuclear-powered ones, than the rest of the world combined, as their coastline surrounds over half of the Arctic Ocean.
In contrast, the United States does not have any direct military bases established in the Arctic Ocean. The U.S. has five bases in the Arctic region, with four in Alaska and one, the Pituffik Space Force Base, located in Greenland.
Eric Cole, a former CIA official and CEO of Secure Anchor, emphasized the strategic importance of Greenland from a defense perspective, pointing out that its location between North America, Europe, and Eurasia serves as a natural advantage for monitoring aerial and missile activities.
Pat Jameson, a U.S. space operations expert, explained that polar orbit satellites are crucial for modern intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance capabilities, as these orbits provide unique Earth observation perspectives.
Cole also highlighted Greenland’s role as a pivot point, merging data from satellites, radar arrays, and maritime sensors into a unified operational picture.
With the changing climate, the Arctic shipping routes are expanding, making Greenland’s monitoring post increasingly essential. It has become a frontline outpost for the entire North Atlantic security architecture.
In 2018, China declared itself a “near-Arctic state” and emphasized its importance in Arctic affairs, wanting to establish a Polar Silk Road as a gateway to the global Belt and Road Initiative.
An analysis titled “China-Russia Relations in the Arctic” released by the RAND Corporation in July 10, 2024, highlighted China’s strengthening influence in the Arctic region since the 1990s, with many state-backed Chinese companies investing in oil, natural gas, mineral exploration, infrastructure construction, and Arctic shipping routes.
Armand Cucciniello, a former U.S. diplomat and Army official, emphasized the growing importance of Greenland in U.S. defense strategy.
“For the United States, acquiring Greenland offers five strategic advantages: deploying early warning radar, enhancing space surveillance capabilities, monitoring naval movements in the North Atlantic, opening new shipping lanes, and gaining access to abundant critical minerals and rare earth elements essential for modern technology,” Cucciniello stated.
The strategic geopolitical importance of Greenland today may exceed that of the World War II and Cold War era, with Greenland serving as a vital asset in the increasing competition between major powers, primarily against Russia but also involving China.
Greenland is surrounded by the only two waterways connecting the Arctic Ocean and the North Atlantic: the Davis Strait on the west, part of the Baffin Sea, and the Greenland-Iceland-UK Gap in the Denmark Strait on the east.
Thule, now the Pituffik Space Base, remains the only official U.S. military facility in Greenland and serves as an important early warning station with 150 military personnel stationed there, located just a stone’s throw away from Russia’s airbase on an island in the Arctic Ocean, including the Nagurskoye Airbase where significant MiG-31 “Foxhound” fighter jets are deployed, according to satellite imagery.
Analysts suggest that the current geopolitical significance of Greenland may surpass that of the World War II and Cold War periods.
Juan Carlos Lascurain-Grosvenor, CEO of Grosvenor Square Consulting Group, believes that controlling the expanding trade routes in the Arctic region will bring significant benefits to the United States.
He explained, “The vulnerability of modern supply chains is not due to distance but rather over-concentration.”
Lascurain-Grosvenor stated, “Many trades still rely on a few vital chokepoints and jurisdictions that are susceptible to political, military, or sanction disruption. The Arctic routes provide a new transportation path for energy, commodities, and strategic goods, reducing systemic risks,” he emphasized.
For both the European and North American markets, working together or controlling passages in the so-called “chokepoints” such as the Panama Canal and the Suez Canal is crucial as rival regimes can restrict passage through these vital waterways, leading to higher prices or supply shortages.
He further elaborated that allowing Russia or China to “set the rules in the Arctic” could have negative macroeconomic consequences and far-reaching effects due to the geological features of the region.
“Russia has indicated that it views energy, logistics, and geography as political weapons. China, on the other hand, uses infrastructure control and financial dependence to consolidate its decades-long influence,” he stated. “Neither of these models can create efficient markets, transparent prices, or legal certainty, all of which are essential for global trade and capital markets.”
Over the past two decades, there has been a significant increase in military and commercial traffic in the intermittent open Arctic routes: the Northwest Passage along the Canadian Arctic coast and the Northern Sea Route along the extensive Russian Arctic coastline.
The 900-mile Northwest Passage is reliably passable only during brief windows, but with the reduction of ice cover, the number of navigable passages has increased.
A report by the Harvard’s Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs titled “Explainer: The Northwest Passage’s Shipping Potential, Legal Status, and What’s at Stake” on July 28, 2025, showed that from 1906 to 2006, only 69 complete transits of the Northwest Passage were recorded. However, within the subsequent five years, the number of transits reached this figure, with a total of 69 complete transits between 2006 and 2010.
An analysis report released by the Canadian International Council on December 11, 2015, titled “Close the Gap in the North: Why the United States and Canada Must Clarify the Northwest Passage now,” revealed that over a dozen ships had successfully traversed the Northwest Passage in 2023, and the number was similar in 2024.
The Center for Arctic Policy Studies at the University of Fairbanks indicated that by the 2030s, commercial ships might reliably navigate the Northwest Passage and other Arctic waters without the need for icebreaker escorts and with increasing transit times.
The report from Harvard University highlighted the legal dispute over the international status of the Northwest Passage. While the U.S. claims it as an international strait, Canada asserts sovereign control over the entire passage. Using the Northwest Passage cuts down the oceanic voyage distance from Western Europe through the Panama Canal to Asia by nearly 3,500 nautical miles.
The report also pointed out that Russia supports Canada’s claim since Russia has its exclusive rights to the Northern Sea Route, spanning 3,500 miles.
According to Rosatom, the Russian state atomic energy corporation, their eight nuclear-powered icebreakers under the company ensure smooth navigation along the route, with passage times continually increasing.
A report titled “The Future of the Northern Sea Route – A ‘Golden Waterway’ or a Niche Trade Route” by the Center for Arctic Policy Studies elaborated that Moscow is promoting the Northern Sea Route as an alternative to the Suez Canal, cutting down time and expenses, reducing the transit time between Europe and Asia by up to 50%.
Russia and China are collaborating on the development of the Arctic shipping routes, including the creation of the Transpolar Route – a direct passage through the North Pole, offering a shorter and deeper route than the Northwest Passage or the Northern Sea Route. In 2012, a Chinese icebreaker was among the first vessels to utilize this route.
President Trump has emphasized the importance of Greenland for U.S. national security, particularly regarding the strategic competition with Russia. However, analysts note that due to the region’s geological features, Greenland holds significant significance in challenging China’s dominance in the global metals and minerals market.
Investing in Greenland will position the U.S. assets adjacent to rapidly expanding maritime routes, challenging Russian hegemony, and obstructing China’s Arctic ambitions by placing American interests atop potentially lucrative critical mineral resources.
Chinese processing enterprises dominate the global critical minerals market. Out of the 54 commodities listed in the most recent Critical Minerals List by the U.S. Geological Survey, 15 fully rely on Chinese supply. Additionally, at least 31 commodities depend partially on imports from China.
China produces over 70% of processed metals globally and provides 90% of rare earth elements required by U.S. manufacturers and defense contractors.
Greenland harbors extensive resources, including iron ore, graphite, tungsten, palladium, vanadium, zinc, gold, uranium, copper, and petroleum. However, the attention is drawn to the approximately 1.5 million tons of rare earth reserves in the region, highlighting its significance in this harsh and desolate land.
According to a report named “Greenland, Rare Earths, and Arctic Security” issued on January 8, 2026, by the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, Greenland has initiated only nine mining projects since World War II. Currently, only two mining operations are operational on the island, including the White Mountain anorthosite mine and the Nalunaq gold mine.
At least three projects are planning to extract rare earth minerals from the large deposits in Tanbreez and Kvanefjeld in southwestern Greenland. The Trump administration is supporting one or two of these projects.
In June 2025, the Export-Import Bank of the U.S. issued a letter of intent to provide a $120 million loan to the Critical Metals Corp. for the Tanbreez rare earth mine. If approved, this would mark the Trump administration’s first overseas mining investment.
Greenland previously persuaded the Tanbreez region not to sell the deposits to Chinese buyers, with the Critical Metals Corp. subsequently investing in the project.
Negotiations are underway between the Amaroq Company based in Canada and the Trump administration regarding U.S. investment in exploring gold, copper, germanium, gallium, and other essential mineral resources in Greenland.
In the same month of June, the European Union designated the Amitsosok graphite project as a strategic asset under its Critical Raw Materials Act. In December 2025, Greenland granted a 30-year mining license to the London-based GreenRoc Mining for the Amitsosok deposit, the third permit issued last year.
However, the development of the Kvanefjeld deposit has been stalled since 2019 due to concerns over Chinese investment in the project. The area holds rich reserves of neodymium, dysprosium, and other rare earth minerals. While the Greenland Minerals, an Australian company, owns the majority stake, a report by the Atlantic Council shows that Shanghai Resources, a Chinese rare earth company, is the project’s largest shareholder and strategic partner.
Unlike the Tanbreez region, the Kvanefjeld deposit is estimated to contain 270,000 tons of uranium, ranking as the world’s eighth-largest uranium deposit. However, officials are concerned that mining in the area has been considered illegal under Greenlandic law since 2021.