The four paths of this saga

In recent weeks, US President-elect Donald Trump has shown renewed interest in taking control of Greenland, Denmark’s largely autonomous Arctic territory and the world’s largest island.

He first announced his intention to buy Greenland in 2019, during his first term as president, but this week he went further, refusing to rule out economic or military power to take control.

Danish and European officials responded in the negative, saying that Greenland is not for sale and that its territorial integrity must be preserved.

So how can this unusual situation come about, where two NATO allies are fighting over a vast area that is 80% covered in ice but has significant untapped mineral wealth?

And how can the desire for independence of the 56,000-strong population of Greenland, which has been under Danish control for 300 years, affect the final result?

Here we consider four possible scenarios for Greenland’s future.

There is some speculation that Trump’s move is just bragging rights, a move to force Denmark to strengthen Greenland’s security in the face of threats from Russia and China, which are seeking influence in the region.

last month, Denmark has announced a new military package worth $1.5bn (£1.2bn). for the Arctic. It was prepared before Trump’s statement, but the statement hours after it was called “irony of fate” by the Danish defense minister.

“The important thing about Trump’s words was that Denmark must fulfill its commitments in the Arctic, or it must allow the US to do so,” said Elizabeth Swann, Politiken’s chief political correspondent.

Mark Jacobsen, an associate professor at the Royal Danish Defense College, believes that this is a case of Trump “positioning himself before taking office”, while Greenland uses this opportunity to gain more international credibility as an important step towards independence.

So even if Trump were to lose interest in Greenland now, which Professor Jacobsen believes is the most likely scenario, he has certainly brought attention to the issue.

But Greenlandic independence has been on the agenda for years, and some say the debate could even go the other way.

“I’ve noticed in the last few days that the Prime Minister of Greenland is more relaxed in his comments – meaning, yes, we want independence, but for the long term,” says Sven.

There is a general consensus in Greenland that independence will eventually happen, and that if Greenland votes for it, Denmark will accept and ratify it.

However, it is also unlikely that Greenland will vote for independence unless its residents are given guarantees that they can keep the subsidies they currently receive from Denmark to pay for things like healthcare and social security.

“Greenland’s prime minister may be armed now, but if he does call a referendum, he’ll need some compelling narrative on how to save Greenland’s economy and welfare system,” Ulrik Gad, senior researcher About The Danish Institute for International Studies reported to the BBC.

One possible next step is free association – something like the US currently has with the Pacific nations of the Marshall Islands, Micronesia and Palau.

Denmark has previously opposed this status for both Greenland and the Faroe Islands, but current Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen is not adamantly opposed, according to Dr. Gadd.

“The Danish understanding of the historical experience of Greenland is much better than it was 20 years ago,” he says, as Denmark assumes colonial responsibility.

Recent discussions “could persuade (Frederiksen) to say it’s better to keep Denmark in the Arctic, to keep some connection with Greenland, even if it’s freer,” he adds.

But even if Greenland can get rid of Denmark, it has become clear in recent years that it cannot get rid of the US. The Americans have never left the island since taking control of it during World War II and consider it vital to their security.

The 1951 agreement confirmed Denmark’s basic sovereignty over the island, but essentially gave the US everything it wanted.

Dr. Gadd said Greenlandic officials had been in contact with the last two US administrations about Washington’s role.

“Now they know that the US will never leave,” he said.

There has been speculation that Trump’s economic rhetoric is potentially the biggest threat to Denmark – the US sharply increasing tariffs on goods from Denmark or even the EU, forcing Denmark to make some concessions on Greenland.

Professor Jacobsen says Danish governments have been preparing for this, and not just because of the Arctic territory.

Trump has threatened blanket 10% tariffs on all US imports, which, among other things, could significantly disrupt European growth, and some Danish and other European companies are now considering setting up manufacturing bases in the US.

Possible options for raising tariffs include the application of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) of 1977, Benjamin Cote of international law firm Pillsbury told MarketWatch.

One of the main areas of Danish industry that could be affected by this is the pharmaceutical industry. The US gets products from Denmark, such as hearing aids and most of its insulin, as well as the diabetes drug Ozempic, made by Denmark’s Novo Nordisk.

Analysts say the price increases that will result from these measures will not go down well with the US public.

The “nuclear option” seems far-fetched, but with Trump not ruling out military action, it should be considered.

In fact, it would not be difficult for the US to take control, given that they already have bases and many troops in Greenland.

“The US is already de facto in control,” says Professor Jacobsen, adding that Trump’s remarks seemed ignorant and he did not understand their meaning.

However, any use of military force by Washington would lead to an international incident.

“If they invade Greenland, they invade NATO,” Sven says. “So it stops there. Article 5 would have to be invoked. And if a NATO country invades NATO, then there will be no NATO.”

Dr. Ged says Trump sounds like Chinese President Xi Jinping talking about Taiwan or Russia’s Vladimir Putin talking about Ukraine.

“He says we are legally taking this piece of land,” he says. “If we take him really seriously, it’s a bad sign for the entire Western alliance.”