Greenland's premier warns Trump's ambition to control Arctic island persists

The leader of Greenland has publicly asserted that US President Donald Trump’s underlying ambition to assume control of the strategically vital Arctic island remains firmly intact, despite a temporary de-escalation of rhetoric. In an address to Greenland’s parliament in Nuuk on Monday, Premier Jens-Frederik Nielsen stated that the US president's view on Greenland and its population has not shifted. His assessment underscores deep-seated concerns in the autonomous Danish territory over its sovereignty amid great power competition.

A core objective deemed "valid and unchanged"

Premier Nielsen’s speech, reported by Danish broadcaster DR, offered a blunt interpretation of Washington's stance. He characterized the overarching US objective as unambiguous: "Greenland must be taken over and governed by the US." He concluded somberly that this goal, from Greenland's perspective, "unfortunately, remains valid and unchanged." This declaration suggests that recent diplomatic maneuvers have done little to alleviate Nuuk's apprehension about America's long-term intentions, which Trump has previously justified using national security arguments related to Russian and Chinese activity in the Arctic.

From threats to talks: a diplomatic timeline

The current diplomatic crisis began when President Trump openly called for US control over Greenland, citing strategic imperatives, and threatened sanctions against European nations that opposed the move. Following a meeting with NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Trump withdrew the explicit threats, announcing instead that a framework for a deal concerning Greenland and the broader Arctic region had been established. This shift paved the way for formal trilateral talks between the United States, Denmark, and Greenland’s government, which commenced last week to address the standoff.

Broader implications for Arctic sovereignty

The dispute highlights the intensifying geopolitical scramble for influence and resources in the Arctic, a region where climate change is opening new sea routes and access to minerals. For other nations with Arctic interests or those, like Türkiye, that follow global strategic shifts, Greenland's predicament illustrates how smaller territories can become focal points in great power rivalries. The outcome of the ongoing talks will be closely watched as a test of whether diplomatic channels can effectively safeguard the self-determination of smaller populations against the expansive strategic designs of major powers.