If you have been keeping up with the news in any capacity, then you may have some questions regarding President Trumpās desire to occupy Greenland. Regardless of your political alignment, it is valid to ask why this is a possibility or even a consideration.Ā
To start, we need to think about where Greenland is located. Greenland is northeast of the United States. The significance of this geography is its Arctic positioning. One reason this particular location is attractive is because of its proximity to 3 shipping routes. The North Sea Route, the Northwest Passage, and the Transpolar Sea Route (Ali & Duggal, 2026). The closeness of these routes is becoming significantly more important as global warming occurs, because when the ice melts, access to this region is increased.Ā
President Donald Trump posted on X, “The United States needs Greenland for the purpose of National Security. It is vital for the Golden Dome that we are building. NATO should be leading the way for us to get it. IF WE DONāT, RUSSIA OR CHINA WILL, AND THAT IS NOT GOING TO HAPPEN!” (@realDonaldTrump). We can already understand that if China or Russia gains access to these routes, it can disrupt the peace we have in the Atlantic. In order to protect NATO countries, NATOās control of the Atlantic is not just desirable, but vital (Hertling, 2026).Ā Ā
You may be wondering why it would be worth it for Russia or China to invade Greenland just to interfere in the Atlantic. Wouldnāt that be expensive? Couldnāt it put their military at risk? Those are all valid questions, and while important, military expansion isnāt the only thing making Greenland occupation so appealing to these countries (and perhaps to the U.S. as well). Greenland is extremely rich in natural resources. An article from BBC News states, āOverall, 25 of 34 minerals deemed ācritical raw materialsā by the European Commission are found in Greenland, including graphite, niobium and titanium, according to the 2023 Geological Survey of Denmark and Greenlandā (Kaye & Mitchell, 2026). This abundance of materials can generate prosperity and drive economic growth for a country. The combination of these factors makes it realistic to assume that Russia and China would be intrigued by Greenland, and that their presence there could be a threat to the United States and Europe.Ā
Is U.S. occupation really necessary though? During the cold war, the United States and Denmark signed āThe 1951 Defense of Greenland agreementā. This agreement states that the U.S. has permission to expand its military presence in Greenland (Roos, 2026). Many people are questioning if U.S. invasion is necessary if Denmark has said that they will unequivocally continue to allow the U.S. to maintain and even grow its activity as we see fit. Could access to natural resources also be an incentive to the United States? It seems reasonable to assume it is. China currently dominates in possession of rare earth minerals with a massive 44 million metric tons (Huld, 2025). U.S. ownership of Greenland can give the United States a fighting chance to compete with China in this area. It is important to keep in mind that in order to acquire a foreign territory, the U.S. needs congressional approval and funding, which may be a barrier in Trumpās plan of expansion and acquisition. To answer the question of necessity, it depends on who youāre asking. The current U.S. administration would say yes, but the governments of not just Greenland and Denmark, but also a variety of other European countries, would say absolutely not, and they have.
What does this mean for NATO? āArticle 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty states that an armed attack against one NATO member shall be considered an attack against all members, and triggers an obligation for each member to come to its assistanceā (NATO, 1949). Trump has been persistent aboutĀ wanting control of this territory, but how would he go about it? An armed military attack would likely result in a disruption of NATO ā one of the strongest global alliances that has ever existed. Secretary of State Marco Rubio stated on Wednesday, January 28th, āI thought it was noteworthy and important that the president, at a speech in Davos, made very clear that the United States was not going to use force or military force. So I think weāre going to wind up in a good place.ā Though reassuring, we cannot rule out the possibility of an invasion, especially given Trump’s rhetoric and pattern of pursuing the things he considers valuable.
It is still unknown the lengths to which the President will go to to realize his dream of acquiring Greenland. There is no doubt that countries like China and Russia could benefit greatly from a presence in Greenland, which would surely be calamitous for the US and for Europe. But there are lots of ways in which we as a country could prevent that ā many of which may include methods that wouldn’t require acquisition and the possible consequences that could come with it.
Sources:
Ali, Marium, and Hanna Duggal. āGreenlandās Strategic Position in Seven Maps: Why Trump Wants the Island.ā Al Jazeera, 21 Jan. 2026, www.aljazeera.com/news/2026/1/21/greenlands-strategic-position-in-seven-maps-why-trump-wants-the-island.
Hertling, Mark. āNATOās Been Talking about Greenland for Years.ā Thebulwark.com, The Bulwark, 26 Jan. 2026, www.thebulwark.com/p/nato-been-talking-about-greenland-denmark-trump-russia-defense. Accessed 29 Jan. 2026.
Huld, Arendse. āChinaās Rare Earth Elements: What Businesses Need to Know.ā China Briefing News, July 2025, www.china-briefing.com/news/chinas-rare-earth-elements-dominance-in-global-supply-chains/.
Mitchell, Archie, and Danielle Kaye. āGreenland: What Natural Resources Does the Island Have?ā BBC, 23 Jan. 2026, www.bbc.com/news/articles/cly9230yw15o.
NATO. āCollective Defence and Article 5.ā Site Name Seo, 2025, www.nato.int/en/what-we-do/introduction-to-nato/collective-defence-and-article-5?selectedLocale=.
Roos, Dave. āThe 1951 Agreement Allowing US Military in Greenland.ā HISTORY, 15 Jan. 2026, www.history.com/articles/1951-agreement-that-allows-us-military-presence-in-greenland.Trump, Donald [@realDonaldTrump]. “The United States needs Greenland for the purpose of National Security. It is vital for the Golden Dome that we are building. NATO should be leading the way for us to get it. IF WE DONāT, RUSSIA OR CHINA WILL, AND THAT IS NOT GOING TO HAPPEN!” Twitter, January 14, 2026, 11:31AM, https://x.com/WhiteHouse/status/2011476193732645080/photo/1