The United States military bombing of Venezuela and the capturing of its president, Nicolas Maduro, marked a turning point in the United States of the 2020s. Though this turn of events shocked the nation, it has certainly proved itself to be just one example of President Donald Trump’s unwavering willingness to exert overwhelming force for political advancement.
Thus, the case in point is Greenland, an autonomous territory within the Kingdom of Denmark.
In the past, Trump has repeatedly expressed his ambitions to gain the territory in both his first and second terms. Speaking to a joint session of Congress last March, Trump claimed the U.S. would acquire the strategic territory “one way or the other.” This month, he restated his sentiments before a planned visit to the Arctic island by Vice President JD Vance. “We’ll go as far as we have to go,” Trump said. “We need Greenland. And the world needs us to have Greenland, including Denmark.”
But why Greenland, a territory of which 80% is covered in ice? The Trump Administration has provided two arguments in favor of taking Greenland:
First, the U.S. places importance on gaining control of untapped resources. Raw materials like titanium, graphite and rare earth minerals are vital to emerging technologies, used in wind turbines, electric vehicles, energy storage technologies and national security applications such as advanced weapons systems, aerospace technology, and military communications.
Second, the U.S. has sought to maintain and advance U.S. security through international means. “The U.S. has an early warning air base in northwestern Greenland because the shortest route for a Russian ballistic missile to reach the continental United States is via Greenland and the North Pole,” said Otto Svendsen, associate fellow with the Europe, Russia and Eurasia Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.
However, this includes economic security as well. The 2025 Center for Strategic and International Studies report found that the U.S. imports 50 – 100% of 41 of the 50 critical minerals listed by the U.S. Geological Survey. Meanwhile, China imports and controls 40-90% of the global supply of these critical elements, leading the U.S. to worry about China’s ability to counter U.S. tariff policies as the country gains more geopolitical power.
If Trump succeeds in acquiring Greenland, the move will have severe international consequences. Rejecting a strategy of democracy and cooperation (established and followed after the Cold War) for one that prioritizes material goals and interests will almost certainly cause tensions between U.S. allies in NATO.
In a joint statement, leaders of France, Germany, Italy, Poland, Spain, Britain and Denmark agreed that “Greenland belongs to its people. It is for Denmark and Greenland, and them only, to decide on matters concerning Denmark and Greenland.” If military force were used to seize Greenland, it would place a significant strain on this network and undermine its cohesion, complicating future cooperation among its members.
