Reality Check for Trump, the Aspiring "Ruler of Greenland"
Here’s what the president-elect can accomplish regarding the autonomous territory.
TroibNews 
Donald Trump’s proposal to purchase Greenland may seem far-fetched, but it is not entirely out of the realm of possibility.
If the president-elect is truly committed to acquiring the world’s largest island, he could pursue a direct purchase if Greenland were to declare independence from Denmark. He might aim to establish it as a commonwealth akin to Puerto Rico or incorporate it into an agreement similar to the one the U.S. has with Micronesia and the Marshall Islands, which grants the U.S. military unrestricted access in exchange for defense and financial support.
“There are tons of variations in terms of what is administered by the Interior Department,” said Alex Gray, the National Security Council chief of staff during the first Trump administration. “It’s not a one-size fits all and we have precedent for doing a lot of options.”
Should purchasing Greenland prove unfeasible, Trump could still seek to expand U.S. military bases to monitor Russian and Chinese activities in the region. If Greenland's inhabitants consent—though they may not—he could explore methods to exert greater authority over the island.
Here are potential avenues for the incoming president to reshape the U.S.-Greenland relationship, along with the challenges he would face.
**Buy it**
Trump’s circle is reportedly contemplating the possibility of negotiations that could lead to Greenland becoming a U.S. territory. Gray noted that this aligns with a broader strategy to reorient American foreign policy toward the Western Hemisphere in response to China and Russia's increasing focus on the region.
“I don’t think it’s out of the realm of possibility that he could do a direct purchase,” he said.
To find a historical precedent, Gray pointed to Denmark's 17th-century acquisition of St. Croix from France. This territory was later purchased by the U.S. as part of a 1916 treaty and now belongs to the Virgin Islands.
The U.S. has previously proposed acquiring Greenland from Denmark, a long-concealed plan that came to light in the 1990s.
However, many Greenlanders are skeptical about the idea of joining the U.S. The island’s prime minister has advocated for independence from Denmark within the next decade, asserting that Greenland is “not for sale and never will be for sale.”
Even Trump’s supporters recognize the complexities involved in negotiating Greenland's future due to its significant economic potential, particularly the vast reserves of unexplored minerals and hydrocarbons beneath its melting Arctic ice sheets.
Greenland already operates with many powers typically associated with independent nations. As a self-governing territory of Denmark, it enjoys substantial autonomy, allowing it to elect its own leaders while Copenhagen manages its foreign relations and national defense.
“Denmark doesn’t claim to own it,” said Scott Anderson, a former State Department attorney and national security expert. “I am quite confident that the government of Denmark, as we’ve seen them say things, doesn’t think it has the legal authority to sell Greenland to anyone.”
The U.S. has not outright purchased territory since acquiring the Philippines from Spain in the late 1800s. Furthermore, international law generally prohibits the buying, selling, or theft of territory.
“If it’s not internationally recognized as valid and legitimate, then that’s going to cause all sorts of complications in actually benefiting from that relationship with Greenland,” Anderson added.
**Take it**
While Trump might not rule out military action, such a move would provoke global outrage.
“That would be taking a page from the Saddam Hussein and Putin playbook,” said Brian Finucane, a former legal advisor at the State Department under three presidents. “This rhetoric from Trump is concerning because he is the incoming U.S. president and his words by themselves have foreign relations consequences.”
**Strike a deal**
If Greenland opts for independence, the U.S. could still establish a framework that would enable it to extend its influence on the island.
The U.S. currently maintains similar arrangements, known as Compacts of Free Association, with Micronesia, the Marshall Islands, and Palau in the Pacific.
Such a compact would grant the U.S. exclusive military access and the power to determine which countries can have troop bases in Greenland. This arrangement would strengthen the Pentagon's presence in the region while countering Chinese access to Arctic shipping routes, especially as the Polar ice caps recede and Russia bolsters its military infrastructure in Murmansk.
This arrangement resembles the current relationship between Greenland and Denmark, although the three Pacific nations function as independent states. During his first term, the Trump administration even entertained the idea of negotiating a COFA with Greenland.
Some former U.S. officials believe that this model could relieve pressure on Copenhagen, given that Greenland's landmass is about 50 times larger than Denmark, while the latter's military is smaller than New York City’s police force.
“Denmark understands that Greenland is going to get independence,” Gray said. “They understand they don’t have the ability to defend Greenland post-independence.”
However, Trump’s implicit threat of military action regarding Greenland elicited warnings from both Germany and France, implying that even the U.S. aiding the island in distancing itself from Denmark could have international repercussions.
**Flex some muscle**
If acquiring Greenland or negotiating a defense deal proves unviable, the president-elect may consider increasing the presence of U.S. military bases on the island.
There are notable gaps in U.S. and NATO surveillance coverage in parts of the Atlantic and Arctic Oceans, signaling a potential need for more sophisticated sensors at the Pituffik Space Base located on Greenland’s northwestern tip.
“Norway keeps an eye on it, we keep an eye on it,” said Jim Townsend, a former senior Pentagon official focused on NATO and Arctic defense policies. “That fills a gap. That’s important.”
Gray, who served in the Trump administration, stated that preventing Russia and China from taking advantage of Greenland is in the interest of all parties involved.
“The Chinese are experts at exploiting these developing, lightly populated countries and using them for their own purposes,” he said. “[Denmark] understands that a Greenland that’s susceptible to coercion is not in their interest or our interest.”
Nahal Toosi contributed to this report.
Frederick R Cook contributed to this report for TROIB News
If the president-elect is truly committed to acquiring the world’s largest island, he could pursue a direct purchase if Greenland were to declare independence from Denmark. He might aim to establish it as a commonwealth akin to Puerto Rico or incorporate it into an agreement similar to the one the U.S. has with Micronesia and the Marshall Islands, which grants the U.S. military unrestricted access in exchange for defense and financial support.
“There are tons of variations in terms of what is administered by the Interior Department,” said Alex Gray, the National Security Council chief of staff during the first Trump administration. “It’s not a one-size fits all and we have precedent for doing a lot of options.”
Should purchasing Greenland prove unfeasible, Trump could still seek to expand U.S. military bases to monitor Russian and Chinese activities in the region. If Greenland's inhabitants consent—though they may not—he could explore methods to exert greater authority over the island.
Here are potential avenues for the incoming president to reshape the U.S.-Greenland relationship, along with the challenges he would face.
**Buy it**
Trump’s circle is reportedly contemplating the possibility of negotiations that could lead to Greenland becoming a U.S. territory. Gray noted that this aligns with a broader strategy to reorient American foreign policy toward the Western Hemisphere in response to China and Russia's increasing focus on the region.
“I don’t think it’s out of the realm of possibility that he could do a direct purchase,” he said.
To find a historical precedent, Gray pointed to Denmark's 17th-century acquisition of St. Croix from France. This territory was later purchased by the U.S. as part of a 1916 treaty and now belongs to the Virgin Islands.
The U.S. has previously proposed acquiring Greenland from Denmark, a long-concealed plan that came to light in the 1990s.
However, many Greenlanders are skeptical about the idea of joining the U.S. The island’s prime minister has advocated for independence from Denmark within the next decade, asserting that Greenland is “not for sale and never will be for sale.”
Even Trump’s supporters recognize the complexities involved in negotiating Greenland's future due to its significant economic potential, particularly the vast reserves of unexplored minerals and hydrocarbons beneath its melting Arctic ice sheets.
Greenland already operates with many powers typically associated with independent nations. As a self-governing territory of Denmark, it enjoys substantial autonomy, allowing it to elect its own leaders while Copenhagen manages its foreign relations and national defense.
“Denmark doesn’t claim to own it,” said Scott Anderson, a former State Department attorney and national security expert. “I am quite confident that the government of Denmark, as we’ve seen them say things, doesn’t think it has the legal authority to sell Greenland to anyone.”
The U.S. has not outright purchased territory since acquiring the Philippines from Spain in the late 1800s. Furthermore, international law generally prohibits the buying, selling, or theft of territory.
“If it’s not internationally recognized as valid and legitimate, then that’s going to cause all sorts of complications in actually benefiting from that relationship with Greenland,” Anderson added.
**Take it**
While Trump might not rule out military action, such a move would provoke global outrage.
“That would be taking a page from the Saddam Hussein and Putin playbook,” said Brian Finucane, a former legal advisor at the State Department under three presidents. “This rhetoric from Trump is concerning because he is the incoming U.S. president and his words by themselves have foreign relations consequences.”
**Strike a deal**
If Greenland opts for independence, the U.S. could still establish a framework that would enable it to extend its influence on the island.
The U.S. currently maintains similar arrangements, known as Compacts of Free Association, with Micronesia, the Marshall Islands, and Palau in the Pacific.
Such a compact would grant the U.S. exclusive military access and the power to determine which countries can have troop bases in Greenland. This arrangement would strengthen the Pentagon's presence in the region while countering Chinese access to Arctic shipping routes, especially as the Polar ice caps recede and Russia bolsters its military infrastructure in Murmansk.
This arrangement resembles the current relationship between Greenland and Denmark, although the three Pacific nations function as independent states. During his first term, the Trump administration even entertained the idea of negotiating a COFA with Greenland.
Some former U.S. officials believe that this model could relieve pressure on Copenhagen, given that Greenland's landmass is about 50 times larger than Denmark, while the latter's military is smaller than New York City’s police force.
“Denmark understands that Greenland is going to get independence,” Gray said. “They understand they don’t have the ability to defend Greenland post-independence.”
However, Trump’s implicit threat of military action regarding Greenland elicited warnings from both Germany and France, implying that even the U.S. aiding the island in distancing itself from Denmark could have international repercussions.
**Flex some muscle**
If acquiring Greenland or negotiating a defense deal proves unviable, the president-elect may consider increasing the presence of U.S. military bases on the island.
There are notable gaps in U.S. and NATO surveillance coverage in parts of the Atlantic and Arctic Oceans, signaling a potential need for more sophisticated sensors at the Pituffik Space Base located on Greenland’s northwestern tip.
“Norway keeps an eye on it, we keep an eye on it,” said Jim Townsend, a former senior Pentagon official focused on NATO and Arctic defense policies. “That fills a gap. That’s important.”
Gray, who served in the Trump administration, stated that preventing Russia and China from taking advantage of Greenland is in the interest of all parties involved.
“The Chinese are experts at exploiting these developing, lightly populated countries and using them for their own purposes,” he said. “[Denmark] understands that a Greenland that’s susceptible to coercion is not in their interest or our interest.”
Nahal Toosi contributed to this report.
Frederick R Cook contributed to this report for TROIB News
