The statement, issued on Tuesday, said President Trump considers Greenland’s acquisition a “top national security objective” amid growing Russian and Chinese activity in the Arctic. “The president and his team are discussing a range of options to pursue this important foreign policy goal,” the White House said, adding that the use of the US military remains “at the commander-in-chief’s disposal.”
Greenland is an autonomous territory within the Kingdom of Denmark and a strategic part of the NATO alliance. Its location between North America and Europe makes it critical for missile warning systems, Arctic surveillance, and emerging shipping routes opened by melting ice.
European leaders swiftly rejected Washington’s rhetoric. Leaders of Denmark, the UK, France, Germany, Italy, Poland and Spain issued a joint statement affirming that “Greenland belongs to its people” and that any decisions about its future rest solely with Greenland and Denmark. They stressed that Arctic security must be handled collectively through NATO and in line with international law.
Denmark’s Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen warned that any US military action against Greenland would amount to an attack on a NATO member, risking the collapse of the alliance itself. “If one NATO country uses force against another, nothing of NATO would remain,” she said in a televised interview.
Greenland’s Prime Minister Jens-Frederik Nielsen also condemned the remarks, calling them disrespectful and unnecessary. He said Greenland is not for sale and urged calm, noting that existing security arrangements with the US remain unchanged under a 1951 defence agreement that allows American bases on the island.
The controversy intensified after Katie Miller, wife of senior White House official Stephen Miller, shared an image of Greenland draped in the US flag with the caption “Coming soon,” drawing criticism in Denmark and Greenland.
Trump has repeatedly cited Greenland’s strategic value, pointing to its mineral wealth, rare earth reserves, and role in monitoring Arctic activity. US officials argue that expanding influence there would help counter China’s dominance in rare earth supply chains and Russia’s growing Arctic footprint.
Under NATO’s Article 5, an attack on one member is considered an attack on all. As rhetoric escalates, diplomats warn that even speculative talk of force risks undermining alliance unity at a time of heightened global tensions.
