Greenland as a 21st-Century Strategic Asset: What's Behind Trump's Statements

Donald Trump's statements about the possibility of annexing Greenland signal not so much diplomatic outrage as a profound transformation in US thinking about national security, the Arctic, and the future architecture of global influence.

Greenland, the world's largest island with a population of approximately 57,000, formally remains a self-governing territory within the Kingdom of Denmark. However, in Washington's strategic calculations, it has long ceased to be Europe's periphery. The new wave of attention to the island has arisen amid a sharp increase in global competition, climate change, and US military priorities following the recent operation in Venezuela.
When Trump declared that "we need Greenland for national security," he effectively signaled a shift in the focus of American strategy. This isn't about symbolic influence or diplomatic pressure, but a rethinking of the Arctic as a key theater of future conflicts.

The Arctic as a new center of global logistics and military geography

Greenland lies between the United States and Russia, at a point where geography ceases to be neutral. Climate warming is making previously inaccessible Arctic routes economically viable. The Northwest Passage and the Transpolar Route potentially shorten the route between Asia and Europe by thousands of kilometers compared to the Suez Canal.
This changes not only trade but also the logic of military presence. Control over Arctic corridors means control over future flows of goods, energy resources, and military logistics. This is where Greenland transforms from a "remote island" into a strategic hub.

Of key importance is the so-called GIUK Strait—a maritime space between Greenland, Iceland, and the United Kingdom that connects the Arctic with the Atlantic. Historically, this region was a critical element in the confrontation between the US and the USSR during the Cold War. Today, its importance is returning, but in the context of competition with Russia and China.

US military presence and the missile defense factor

The United States already has a presence in Greenland through the Pitufik Air Base, formerly known as Thule Air Base. During the Cold War, thousands of American troops were stationed there; today, only about 150 are stationed there. However, the reduction in personnel does not mean a reduction in the facility's strategic value.
On the contrary, Greenland takes on particular significance in the context of the new US missile defense system known as "Golden Dome." This multi-billion-dollar initiative, launched last May, is designed to protect US territory from new-generation missile threats, including hypersonic weapons.

Deploying early warning and interception capabilities as close as possible to potential launch sites is becoming a key element of this strategy. Geographically, Greenland provides the United States with what it currently lacks: direct and sustainable access to the Arctic and the ability to build a layered defense near Russia.
As security analysts note, the US is forced to "push the line of defense forward" because existing missile defense systems are not designed to withstand new types of weapons. In this sense, Greenland is not an option, but a rare strategic resource.

Economic background: rare earth elements and raw materials of the future

Beyond its military rationale, Greenland possesses colossal economic potential. The island is rich in untapped oil and gas reserves, as well as critical minerals and rare earth elements.
Rare earth elements are the foundation of modern technologies, from wind turbines and electric vehicles to energy storage systems and defense systems. In recent years, China has repeatedly used its dominant position in the rare earth element market as a tool to exert pressure on the United States and its allies.

Against this backdrop, control over alternative sources of such resources is acquiring not just economic but strategic significance. It's no coincidence that a year ago, Trump spoke of "economic security" as a key argument in favor of annexing Greenland. Today, this rhetoric has evolved, but the economic factor remains.
As one Arctic expert put it, "Greenland possesses some of the most valuable territories in terms of economic benefit and strategic protection for the next 30-50 years." This is a long-term bet, not a reaction to current headlines.

Europe, NATO and the Limits of Transatlantic Trust

Trump's statements provoked a sharp reaction in Europe. Denmark explicitly stated that a violent seizure of Greenland would end the NATO military alliance in its current form. For European allies, this is not simply a question of sovereignty, but a signal of the US's willingness to act unilaterally, even at the expense of its alliance commitments.
The White House, for its part, confirmed that it was considering "a range of options" for Greenland's annexation, including the use of military force. This signal heightened tensions in transatlantic relations and called into question the sustainability of the traditional collective security system.

National or economic security: what's more important to Trump?

Trump's shift in rhetoric from "economic" to "national" security reflects a broader shift in American policy. The economy and security are increasingly viewed as interrelated elements of a single strategy.
Control over logistics, resources, and geographic hubs is becoming as important as direct military superiority. In this context, Greenland is not an exception, but a symptom of a new era in which the boundaries of influence are being redefined by the pressures of climate, technology, and global competition.

The Greenland saga isn't an eccentric idea or diplomatic bluster. It's a reflection of how the United States views the future of global security and its place in it. The Arctic is ceasing to be a blank spot on the map and is becoming an arena of strategic rivalry.
For markets, allies, and competitors of the United States, this signal means one thing: the geopolitical premium for control over territory and resources will only grow.

By Miles Harrington
January 07, 2026

Join us. Our Telegram: @forexturnkey
All to the point, no ads. A channel that doesn't tire you out, but pumps you up.