US President Donald Trump has repeatedly voiced his desire for the United States to acquire Greenland, arguing it is crucial for national security. This stance has been met with firm rejections from Greenland's leaders and Denmark, of which Greenland is a semi-autonomous territory and a NATO member. The issue escalated following the US military intervention in Venezuela and became an underlying tension at a European leaders' meeting in Paris discussing Ukraine.

Greenland, the world's largest island not considered a continent, is strategically located in the Arctic. It is the most sparsely populated territory globally, with approximately 56,000 inhabitants, primarily indigenous Inuit people. About 80% of the island is covered by ice, concentrating its population along the south-western coast around the capital, Nuuk. While its economy is largely fishing-based and supported by Danish subsidies, Greenland possesses significant natural resources, including rare earth minerals, uranium, and iron, which are becoming more accessible due to global warming. Despite Trump's past interest in mineral wealth elsewhere, he explicitly stated, "We need Greenland for national security, not minerals," and raised concerns about a purported presence of "Russian and Chinese ships all over the place."

Trump's calls for annexation date back to 2019 when he first offered to buy the island, an offer that was rebuffed. He reignited his interest upon returning to the White House in January 2025, not ruling out the use of force. His administration continued to push the agenda, with Vice-President JD Vance visiting Greenland in March 2025 and criticizing Denmark's investment in the territory's protection. A fresh controversy erupted in late 2025 with Trump's appointment of special envoy Jeff Landry, who openly advocates for Greenland's integration into the US. Trump's top aide, Stephen Miller, also argued that seizing the territory would benefit NATO, asserting that "the US is the power of Nato. For the US to secure the Arctic region, to protect and defend Nato and Nato interests, obviously Greenland should be part of the US."

Greenlandic leaders have unequivocally rejected these advances. Greenland's Prime Minister Jens Frederik Nielsen responded to Trump's renewed threats in early 2026 by stating, "No more pressure. No more insinuations. No more fantasies of annexation. We are open to dialogue. We are open to discussions. But this must happen through the proper channels and with respect for international law." Polling indicates that while most Greenlanders favor independence from Denmark, an overwhelming majority oppose becoming part of the US. Denmark's Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen warned that any attempt by the US to take over Greenland would signify the end of NATO. Other European leaders, including UK counterpart Sir Keir Starmer, have echoed this sentiment, firmly stating "Hands off Greenland."

The US security interest in Greenland is not new, predating Trump's administration, with two prior American attempts to acquire it. Greenland was a Danish colony until the mid-20th century. During World War Two, after Nazi Germany occupied mainland Denmark, the US invaded Greenland, establishing military and radio stations. American forces remained post-war, with Pituffik Space Base (formerly Thule Air Base) operated by the US ever since. A 1951 defense agreement granted the US a significant role in Greenland's defense. In 1953, Greenland became part of the Kingdom of Denmark, and Greenlanders gained Danish citizenship. A 1979 referendum granted Greenland home rule, controlling most domestic policies while Denmark retained foreign affairs and defense. Danish military bases also exist on the island.

The international community's reaction has been complex. At the Paris meeting, European leaders, while striving for a peace deal in Ukraine, faced immense tension regarding Greenland. Denmark's Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen was reportedly pressured by European colleagues not to antagonize the US over Greenland, fearing impacts on US support for Ukraine. Despite this, a joint statement was issued by leaders from the UK, France, Germany, Italy, Poland, Spain, and Denmark, asserting, "Greenland belongs to its people, and only Denmark and Greenland can decide on matters concerning their relations." The statement also emphasized that "Greenland is part of Nato. Security in the Arctic must therefore be achieved collectively, in conjunction with Nato allies including the United States." Critics noted that the statement's limited signatories failed to present a truly united European front.

This situation has highlighted Europe's perceived weakness in confronting Trump. The irony of European nations trying to safeguard Ukraine's sovereignty against Russia, while the US militarily intervened in Venezuela and threatened Denmark's sovereignty, was palpable. As NATO allies, the US and Denmark's strained relationship over Greenland poses an "existential threat to Nato" and a "major crisis for the EU," according to experts like Julianne Smith, former US ambassador to NATO. NATO treaties do not explicitly address one member attacking another, though Article 5 (all for one, one for all) is understood not to apply in such scenarios. European powers have expressed deep-seated nervousness, with many attempting to manage Trump to protect bilateral relations rather than directly confront him.

The EU's history of deferring to Trump, such as failing to use frozen Russian assets for Ukraine or accepting US tariffs without retaliation, underscores its vulnerability. The Greenland situation risks further division within the EU. Experts like Camille Grande of the European Council on Foreign Relations advocate for Europe to reduce security dependencies on the US and speak with a unified voice. While Trump urged NATO allies to increase defense spending, Europe remains heavily reliant on the US for intelligence, command and control, and air capabilities. European officials concede that contemplating a US military move on Greenland is a deeply unsettling prospect, yet one they might be forced to consider.