By Shi Guannan

Recently, US President-elect Donald Trump once again made a bold statement. He said in a social media post that the US "feels that the ownership and control of Greenland is an absolute necessity" for purposes of national security and freedom throughout the World. These remarks have sparked global astonishment and strong opposition from Greenland. Greenland's prime minister, Múte Egede, issued a statement, saying "We are not for sale and we will not be for sale."

Trump floated the idea of purchasing Greenland in 2019, yet it was firmly rejected by Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen and the Greenland Self-Government. The seemingly absurd and rash "island-buying farce" by Donald Trump is, in fact, a comprehensive reflection of American history, his governing style, and the current geopolitical landscape.

Greenland, located at the junction of North America and Europe, covers an area of approximately 2.166 million square kilometers. It is the largest island in the world. Although Greenland is a state of Denmark, it enjoys a high degree of autonomy, with most affairs managed by the autonomous government, except for defense and diplomacy.

For the US, Greenland holds immense economic, military, and strategic value.

First, Greenland is rich in natural resources, particularly metal deposits. It not only has gold, silver, and oil but also abundant rare earth metals like neodymium and dysprosium, as well as nuclear materials such as uranium. These mineral resources are crucial raw materials for products like smart phones, electric vehicles, and weapons such as bombs. Currently, some people in the US are focused on "industrial and supply chain security." They believe that controlling Greenland and diversifying rare earth sources holds significant strategic importance for the US.

Second, the Pituffik Space Base located in the north of Greenland is of great significance to US military security. During the Cold War, the US reached an agreement with Denmark, granting US forces permission to establish military bases and maintain a presence in Greenland. Today, the base is equipped with intelligence-gathering facilities, missile warning systems, and satellite monitoring stations, capable of tracking maritime traffic and providing early warnings of ballistic missile attacks on the US mainland. In recent years, the US has continuously increased its military investment in the base. In 2023, the US Air Force deployed F-35A fighter jets to the base for the first time. The US military also announced plans to strengthen its military deterrence in the Arctic region by increasing the presence of special forces, boosting military exercises, and other means.

Third, Greenland is a crucial transit point on the shortest route connecting North America and Europe. As global warming and glacial melting may lead to the emergence of more Arctic sea routes, it is of great strategic significance for the US to control Greenland. In recent years, the US has placed increasing importance on the strategic value of the Arctic, aiming to dominate Greenland and the Arctic region and marginalize both Russia and China. In August 2024, the Pentagon released the 2024 Arctic Strategy, which emphasized the need to enhance US military capabilities and surveillance activities in the Arctic and ensure that the region does not become a strategic blind spot.

Under the current international system, diplomatic norms, and public consensus, achieving territorial expansion through purchasing faces significant difficulty, so the island-buying dream is Donald Trump is highly unrealistic. However, it is certain that the Donald Trump administration will rely on more interventionist and coercive methods to press other nations to act according to US demands. Ken Howery, the nominee of Donald Trump to serve as ambassador to Denmark, said that he will work toward strengthening the ties between the US, Denmark, and Greenland. Even if the island purchase is unsuccessful, the US will increase its strategic deployment and gain more benefits through political pressure, military cooperation, economic and trade exchanges, and other means. This could not only strain relationships with US allies and partners but also exacerbate the militarization of the Arctic region and further worsen the security situation there.

(The author is an assistant research fellow at the Institute of American Studies of China Institute of Contemporary International Relations)

Editor's note: Originally published on china.com.cn, this article is translated from Chinese into English and edited by the China Military Online. The information and opinions in this article do not necessarily reflect the views of eng.chinamil.com.cn.