During his 2025 inaugural speech, President Donald Trump talked about the United States becoming “A growing nation” that “Expands our territory… and carries our flag into new and beautiful horizons.” While this statement alone is relatively vague, the president’s recent comments seem to carry out that promise. Additionally, the president also mentioned “[Pursuing] our manifest destiny.” Right there, he was talking about sending American astronauts to Mars. Yet again, his actions since then imply that American expansion may be even closer on planet Earth.
From wanting Canada as the 51st first state and reclaiming the Panama Canal to talks of making Greenland an American territory and “owning” Gaza, President Trump has made it clear he has plans to increase American territory, even if the details remain murky.
Looking at the U.S.’s history in acquiring territory is a vital first step in answering these questions. Associate Professor Aubrey Jewett, an assistant director at the School of Politics, Security, and International Affairs at the University of Central Florida, explained what taking over foreign territory has meant to the U.S.
“Even before our country was founded, it was based on taking away land that was already occupied by someone else,” Jewett said in an interview.
Jewett explained that those immigrating to the original 13 colonies might have been “looking for a better life,” but Native Americans already occupied the land.
After the establishment of the United States, westward expansion and the continuation of taking land were perpetuated by the concept of manifest destiny, which President Trump mentioned earlier.
Jewett explained manifest destiny as “the idea that the United States and its residents should expand all the way across to the western coast” and that God designated the land for those people and their descendants.
“President Trump is really fanning the flames of American exceptionalism and greatness,” Jewett said.
Trump’s presidency seems to deviate from past ideals where America was the leader of the free world and helped expand democracy and capitalism with its allies, turning to a perceptive that seems to put America before anyone else. However, the U.S. doesn’t end with the states. American territory also includes Puerto Rico, the U.S. Virgin Islands, Guam, and American Samoa.
This leaves many people questioning if the president has the authority to gain any of these regions under the U.S. Constitution.
“There’s a variety of ways that the United States has added territories in the past, and certainly, the president could move forward to try to do that again,” Jewett said. “Now, what exactly that would look like and how much cooperation he would need from Congress, that’s a different story.”
Jewett explained that, essentially, the checks and balances in place in the U.S. government make it difficult for the president to make significant decisions without the support of the other branches.
Given the global reactions to President Trump’s comments, this question has been raised if international law has any influence over a president’s actions.
Now, let’s examine why President Trump is watching each region, international reactions, and what it means for the U.S. and American citizens if that area becomes American territory.
President Trump’s comments on Greenland may be stronger, but they certainly aren’t new. In fact, he began speaking about making the currently autonomous Danish territory American during his first term in 2019. According to PBS News, his supporters in Congress have been working on a bill to help facilitate potential negotiations with Denmark before the president returned to office this past January.
But why does the president want this area in the first place? Firstly, it’s home to a large amount of mineral and other natural resources, making it economically appealing. The United States has also had a space base there since 1943, one where 15,000 troops were located during the earlier years of the Cold War, NPR reported. The territory is also directly between the shortest route from America to Europe. However, Russia and China also seek to grow their influence in Greenland.
While Denmark and Greenland have said that accommodating American desires can be discussed, they have also made it clear they are not open to selling the land. Many European nations have backed this stance.
In addition to Greenland, the Panama Canal has also been on the president’s mind and was even mentioned in his inaugural speech. President Trump said that the canal “Was foolishly given to the country of Panama” and promised to reclaim it. But why is his attention returning there? The canal plays a significant role in U.S. trade routes, “With about 40% of all the country’s container ships passing through the waterway,” BBC reported. However, Trump also claimed that China now controls the Canal in his speech.
Panama’s President José Raúl Mulino has denied President Trump’s claims. However, during his meeting with Secretary of State Marco Rubio, President Mulino discussed China’s influence on the canal while asserting that the canal’s future remains with Panama.
That leaves many Americans wondering if taking the canal is truly beneficial. Jewett said it depends.
“Maybe it would be better for America in a sense of security; this is Trump’s argument anyway, and maybe economically,” Jewett said. “On the other hand, maybe it totally damages our relationship with much of the rest of the world if we just aggressively go in and take it because then they start thinking you can’t trust the United States anymore.”
On multiple occasions, Trump has said he wants Canada to be the 51st state. The president claimed that “We lose $200 billion a year with Canada,” calling our northern neighbors “essentially a subsidy” in a Fox News interview with Bret Baier, TIME magazine said. He even went as far as to say that Canada is “‘Not viable as a country’ without U.S. trade […] and can no longer depend on the U.S. for military protection,” TIME reported.
However, TIME Magazine clarified that “The United States is not subsidizing Canada,” explaining that the U.S. purchases natural resource products from Canada. The magazine also explained that although trade gaps have increased, “The deficit largely reflects America’s imports of Canadian energy.” Canadians, however, are far from supportive of this idea, with many strongly opposing the president’s plans.
Although highly unlikely, what would make Canada a state, or multiple states, mean for the U.S.? Naturally, concerns on how statehood would be divided and affect elections arise. Congressional approval would be needed after gauging Canadian interest, and other states would have to reapportion House Representatives to make room for Canada, AP said. Questions about whether military force would be used to gain Canada also arise.
The most recent region Trump has commented on making American territory is Gaza. After meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Trump said he plans for the U.S. to “own” the Gaza Strip and turn it into “the Riviera of the Middle East,” according to the AP. But why? Trump is looking at Gaza as a “‘Real estate development for the future,’” U.S. News reported, creating economic development and bringing stability to the region.
However, his plan requires Palestinians to leave the region and be taken in by allies of Palestine, such as Egypt and Jordan, while Rubio and White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt implied resettlement would be temporary.
Regardless, with the exception of Israel, international responses have been strongly unsupportive of the plan. Al Jazeera reports that nations such as Saudi Arabia and Ireland have called for a two-state solution, with many others advocating against the removal of Palestinians from Gaza, including Jordan and Egypt. According to NPR, Senator Chris Van Hollen called the president’s plan “Ethnic cleansing by another name.”
When asked what could be the potential consequences of Gaza becoming American territory, Jewett believed it was very unlikely to happen given that Palestinians have been fighting for statehood for over 50 years.
“In fact, I think they would redouble their efforts,” Jewett said. “I don’t think there would be a moment’s peace if we went and took over Gaza.”
But one looming question remains. Given the Trump administration’s continuous budget cuts, how do any of these plans coincide with the administration’s goals?
Based on what we know, when it comes to Gaza, the president has commented that Egypt and Jordan would be expected to fund the reconstruction of Gaza and the resettlement of Palestinians, according to U.S. News. In Greenland and Canada, assuming the wealth of natural resources will compensate for what the U.S. might pay is safe. Similarly, if the U.S. gained control of the Panama Canal, it wouldn’t be out of reach to think we might discount our ships, eventually creating a profit.
Still, that doesn’t mean the initial expenses will be small. In the case that these plans are furthered, Jewett said, “If anything involved military action, obviously that’s going to cost hundreds of millions or more dollars.”
So, while Trump certainly has plans to expand to American territory, the chances of these plans actually happening seem unlikely, at least in the near future. Nevertheless, keeping an eye out for the president’s plans and reactions to them holds value, as they not only affect the people of these regions but also directly impact the United States and American citizens.