Greenland between the USA and Europe: what is behind the talks of “annexation”

Greenland intends to develop and strengthen relations with the United States, but talks of a possible American takeover of the island do not correspond to reality. This was stated by Prime Minister Jens-Frederik Nielsen at a press conference in Nuuk amid a new wave of U.S. interest in the Arctic.

The reason for the alarming comparisons was a recent operation by the American military outside Europe, after which several countries again spoke of scenarios of forceful pressure. On the same day, European states publicly expressed support for Greenland, emphasizing that such parallels are inappropriate.

“We are not in a situation where anyone seriously thinks about taking over the country tomorrow,” Nielsen noted, speaking to journalists through a translator. According to him, comparing Greenland to Venezuela is incorrect: the island lives by democratic rules and relies on international law.

The contrast is heightened by statements from Donald Trump, who previously allowed for the possibility of temporary U.S. control over Venezuela and repeatedly spoke of Greenland’s “strategic importance” for American defense. These words caused a resonance both in Copenhagen and Nuuk.

Later, Nielsen wrote on Facebook briefly and harshly: “Enough fantasies about annexation.” His position was supported by Mette Frederiksen, noting that the statements of the U.S. president should be taken seriously, but within the framework of allied obligations. According to her, in the event of an attack on a NATO country, “everything will stop” — a hint at collective security mechanisms.

Greenland is the largest island in the world with a population of about 57,000 people. Formally, it is not a member of NATO, but it is under the protection of the alliance through Denmark’s membership, which includes the U.S. European partners emphasize that the future of the island can only be determined by its people.

British Prime Minister Keir Starmer put it directly: “The future of Greenland should be decided by Greenland and the Kingdom of Denmark — and no one else.” German Foreign Minister Johann Wadephul allowed for discussions in NATO on additional protection for the island, and the European Union reminded of the principle of national sovereignty.

Trump himself, answering journalists’ questions aboard Air Force One, preferred to avoid a detailed conversation, suggesting “focusing on other topics.” However, he again emphasized that Greenland has strategic significance. When one of the reporters noted that “the island is now surrounded by Russian and Chinese ships,” Trump criticized Denmark for, in his opinion, insufficient security measures, allowing himself an ironic remark about a “truck with dogs.”

Geography makes Greenland a key link between Europe and North America. The island is important for the U.S. early warning and missile defense system, and its mineral resources fit into Washington’s strategy to reduce dependence on China.

At the same time, a global security expert from the Danish Institute for International Studies Ulrik Pram Gad notes: yes, Russian and Chinese ships are present in the Arctic, but they are too far away to be seen from the shores of Greenland — whether with binoculars or without them.

Additional resonance was caused by the appointment of Louisiana Governor Jeff Landry as the U.S. special envoy to Greenland. Landry had previously openly advocated for the inclusion of the island in the United States, which heightened caution in Denmark and among the Greenlanders themselves.

During the presidential transition and in the first months of Trump’s second term, he repeatedly insisted on transferring Greenland under U.S. jurisdiction, not excluding even a forceful scenario. One of his former administration officials, who became a podcaster, published a map of the island in the colors of the American flag with the caption “Soon” — the post caused noticeable irritation in Nuuk and Copenhagen.

Denmark’s response was diplomatic but firm. The ambassador in Washington Jesper Møller Sørensen stated that Copenhagen expects full respect for the territorial integrity of the Kingdom of Denmark and the sovereignty of Greenland.

It is this balance — between the strategic interests of great powers and the right of the people to decide their fate — that today defines the conversation about Greenland. For Europe and the North Atlantic, this is a question not of rhetoric, but of the stability of the entire security system, which is increasingly being reminded of both in Nuuk and allied capitals. NAnews — News of Israel | Nikk.Agency