Greenland Folly

January 15, 2026

Of all the fights that President Donald Trump has picked around the world, the most hare-brained is his threat to buy or take over Greenland. He claims the Arctic island is crucial to protecting America and ensuring its prosperity. Both claims are hyperbolic. He intends to expropriate the place, by force if necessary — an unnecessary ultimatum that ignores international law and NATO commitments, and runs roughshod over Greenlanders. He also exaggerates the importance of the Arctic island, both militarily and geologically, and doubled down this week by refusing to rule out military involvement. After meetings with Denmark and other European representatives failed this week, Trump said, “If we don’t go in, Russia’s going to go in, and China’s going to go in, and there’s not a thing Denmark can do about it. But there’s everything we can do. You found that out last week with Venezuela.” NATO allies Denmark, Germany, and France have begun sending in troops to shore up the defenses of the self-governing island, but against the US, another NATO member. A French official stated boldly, “Greenland is not for sale, and it is not for taking — so the threats must stop.”

Greenland is 1.5 times bigger than Alaska

The escalation resembles a Monty Python skit, but Trump’s policy was earnest, even if preposterous. Greenland is not about to be invaded by Russia or China, and its alleged rare earth potential is exaggerated. As an official with The Arctic Institute said, “The idea of turning Greenland into America’s rare-earth factory is science fiction. It’s just completely bonkers. You might as well mine the moon. In some respects, it’s worse than the moon.”

Even so, Trump officials regard Greenland’s underground riches as a way to loosen China’s stranglehold over the rare-earth metals needed for fighter jets, lasers, electric vehicles, and MRI scanners. The facts are that 80% Greenland’s valuable mineral deposits are located above the Arctic Circle beneath a mile-thick polar ice sheet. It is dark most of the time that far north, and there are no roads, airports, or inhabitants. I was in the mining business in Canada for more than a decade, which has a bigger Arctic region laden with resources. Unlike Greenland, it has a world-class mining industry and capital, but development is restricted because costs are exorbitant. Everything from a screwdriver to a donut or a gallon of diesel fuel must be flown in by helicopter. Greenland’s production costs would be stratospheric, likely unaffordable. Trump would be better off getting mining licenses to develop rare earth reserves that exist in Canada or Australia, both allies with skilled labor, expertise, and capital.

As for security fears, Trump believes that Greenland is vital to US national defense, claiming that it will be invaded by Russia and China unless the US “owns” it and that “Russian and Chinese ships are all over the place”. That’s not credible, and besides, the US doesn’t need to grab or buy Greenland because the American military already has a free hand there to increase its presence at any time. There are two US military bases. Both could be enlarged, and more could be built. “We have had close security cooperation with the United States for more than 70 years — an agreement between our two countries, signed in 1951, is still in place,” wrote a Danish parliamentarian.

Currently, Moscow and Beijing coordinate military and economic activities in the vast Arctic and have conducted joint sea and air patrols in recent years, which have raised tensions with the Americans. But Washington responded by bolstering its surveillance and defence systems in the Arctic and Canada and by deploying jets and troops in Alaska to protect the northern perimeter of North America from encroachments and missiles.

Eight members of the Arctic Council

Russia is the biggest player in the Arctic, with the biggest coastline, because it is creating an alternate commercial shipping route that will shave 20 days off the Europe-China journey and bypass the Suez or Panama Canals, called the “Northern Sea Route”. Moscow has built infrastructure along the route that follows Russia’s coastline. Unlike the alternative, north of Canada, which is empty and littered with icebergs and dozens of islands, Russia’s route is ice-free most of the summer, and its Siberian coastline is populated with cities, military facilities, icebreaker fleets, a floating nuclear reactor to power industries, and navigational, search, and rescue capability.

The threat over Greenland is contained, and rare earth resources can be exploited easily elsewhere, so the question is, why Trump’s sudden demand and extreme urgency? My theory is that Trump wants sole proprietorship because he doesn’t want to deal with the bureaucracy, red tape, and endless consultations that afflict the European Union and NATO. He also, like many of us, is unimpressed with Europe’s decades of military freeloading and its foot-dragging even after Russia invaded Ukraine and its own security was at risk. It’s only recently, due to Trump’s hectoring, that Europeans have begun to militarize and support NATO and their “protector” Ukraine.

However, Trump’s hyperbole is unhelpful, and his blunt and bombastic rhetoric over Greenland has been counterproductive. It has sparked blustery and overblown reactions such as the recent dispatch of Euro troops there, for example. Then, there have been dire predictions, such as one by Denmark’s Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen, who stated that a military takeover of Greenland by the United States would effectively destroy the NATO alliance. This was followed by Germany’s President Frank-Walter Steinmeier, who hysterically proclaimed that Trump wanted to destroy the world order. He urged nation-states not to let the world order disintegrate into a “den of robbers” where the unscrupulous can grab whatever they want. He said Russia’s invasion of Ukraine was a watershed, but then claimed that US behaviour was a “second historic rupture”.

(It’s important to note Steinmeier’s past. In 2022, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky refused Steinmeier’s request to show solidarity by coming to Kyiv because of his close ties to Russia’s Sergei Lavrov, and his support for the Nord Stream pipeline, along with the discredited Russian “apologist”, former German Chancellor Gerhard Schroder.)

Putin’s German puppets: Schroder, Siemens bigshot Joe Kaeser, Angela Merkel, and President Steinmeier

Steinmeier’s comparison of Trump’s attempt to get control over Greenland with Russia’s invasion of Ukraine is outrageous and simply more of the Kremlin claptrap he’s pushed for years. Trump is no Putin, who wages genocidal war, and he is not going to invade Greenland or destroy NATO — the Europeans are starting to do that with their behavior and troop deployment this weekend. Britain’s Lord Mandelson, a politician and diplomat, waded into the fray and defended Trump by saying, “He won’t land on Greenland and take it by force. We will all have to wake up to the reality that the Arctic needs to be secured against China and Russia. And if you ask me who is going to lead in that effort to secure, we all know, don’t we, that it’s going to be the United States.”

On January 7, The Wall Street Journal carried a piece criticizing the President’s confrontative style: “Buy it already, don’t bully it” was the headline. The author suggested that Trump’s bluster and threats were simply negotiating techniques designed to help acquire Greenland, but the hint of force has damaged America’s reputation and interests. The point was appropriately made: Trump should drop the “Rambo” bravado, rhetoric, and insults because they are diplomatically and strategically counterproductive. More importantly, he should brush up on his research before betting the farm on questionable strategies and concentrate mostly on stopping the maniacs in Tehran and Moscow.

NOTE TO READERS: Please consider supporting my writing by subscribing to my Substack. A paid subscription grants access to all of my articles year-round.