Overview:

Explaining the origin, history, interests, parties, and the possible future of Greenland’s sovereignty.

Origin

Many remember learning in school that it was Norse explorer Leif Erikson that was the first European to reach North America in 1000 CE., rather than Christopher Columbus in 1492 CE. However, it was actually Leif’s father, Erik the Red, who was the first European to settle Greenland. Shifting colonial claims took place over centuries. They finally settled back to Denmark during the 19th century. In 1953, Greenland was no longer considered a colony. Instead, it became an autonomous county of Denmark itself. Greenland gained home rule in 1979. This means that their autonomy now included most domestic policy. Denmark retained responsibility for foreign policy and defense. Finally, the Self-Governance Act (2009) made Greenlandic the official language of the nation. It also granted more extensive power over internal issues.

Truman Admin offered $100 million for Greenland in 1946

There were two initiatives for the United States to acquire Greenland before either Trump presidency. The first was in 1867, when Secretary of State William Seward expressed interest in a bid to purchase Greenland after acquiring Alaska, but no formal communications were ever made. In 1946, the Truman administration employed a more direct approach. They offered $100 million for the island. Denmark outright refused this offer.

Who is Interested?

In Arctic shipping, there are several maritime chokepoints that slow the flow of capital and other resources globally. One of the most problematic for Russia is the Greenland-Iceland-United Kingdom Gap (GIUK). This is crucial for operations of their Northern Fleet, as well as for general access to the Atlantic. Such access is important in cases of international shipping and militaristic interest.

Similarly, China is interested in the forming of shipping routes in the Arctic. What is dubbed “The Polar Silk Road” would be an ambition to diversify transportation corridors. This would make the trade of natural resources much simpler. This is a part of a much larger initiative, The Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). The BRI is a long-term project looking to consolidate trading routes. It aims to reduce redundancies and inconveniences of the global transportation of trade.

GIUK Gap

The United States is also intent on limiting who can cross the GIUK Gap for both economic and political reasons. The US does not want either China or Russia to gain exclusive or primary access to routes opening around Greenland. That would be an avenue for either power to posture military vessels or restrict trade routes themselves.

Denmark has the most obvious historical ties, with all precedent in Denmark’s favor for retaining some form of governance over Greenland. Greenland is heavily reliant on Denmark economically. Block grants from Denmark constitute around half of Greenland’s annual budget. Furthermore, they make up a quarter of its Gross Domestic Product (GDP).

Canadian Interest

Canadian interest in Greenland’s governance is much closer to a bilateral relationship. Canada is interested in the mining and transportation opportunities evolving over time. However, they have also expressly stated their desire to foster closer economic and cultural ties with indigenous communities. There is a shared interest among both parties. They aim to create economic opportunities to divest away from Chinese overreliance. Additionally, they want to create a period of responsible Arctic marine environment management.

EU Interest

The European Union (EU) also has marked interest in Greenland’s future. This is especially true as the island’s greatest trade partner. The EU would benefit from other powers not locking down any part of the GIUK Gap. It is in the EU’s best interest to continue fostering Greenland’s education sector. The right kind of knowledge and skills would enable Greenland to perform as a maritime linchpin for the region. This would prevent exploitation by other parties. Also of note is Greenlander’s status as EU citizens through their Danish citizenships. Greenland was originally part of the European Economic Community as a territory of Denmark but chose to leave following fishing rights disputes, as well as gaining home rule in 1979. These transitions brought Greenland to become an EU Overseas Country and Territory (OCT). All this was established through the Greenland Treaty (1985).

Why are they Interested?

Greenland rests in a geo-strategic location. This becomes only more convenient as Arctic ice continues to melt. These environmental changes allow for new and more efficient shipping channels in the area. Such developments attract vested interest from the United States, China, and Russia. Furthermore, Greenland has many untapped critical minerals due to a lack of infrastructure and internal interest to invest in mining operations. Things such as diamonds, gold, silver, tungsten, copper, and zinc are present. These minerals have always held value, but the timing of events has increased their value further. Much of what humanity is using or developing as renewable energy resources require these materials. This development has furthered their upsurge in value.

What Happens Now?

Greenland has made a crystal clear statement as to how they feel about their sovereignty. Their 2024 Foreign, Defense, and Security Strategy is titled “Greenland in the World – Nothing About Us Without Us.” This shows that their interest is to not be purchased or governed for much longer. Their movements toward self-determination and independence cement this desire. They in no way intend to be sold by Denmark. The Self-Governance Act of 2009, along with several decades of autonomy concessions, has ensured that it is not entirely in the hands of Denmark to secede Greenland’s territory.

Military

Denmark has been left bemused by the unfolding situation. Many goals that the Trump administration is seeking could be done through legal channels, rather than through purchase of the land or forced annexation. This is especially prudent regarding discussions of having a military presence in the area, which has been downsized drastically from the height of the Cold War until now. Denmark has echoed that the lion’s share of this decision rests in the hands of Greenlanders. They have been continuously moving toward independence and greater self-determination. If America were to force annexation of Greenland, it would be one of the largest and most blatant examples of imperialism by the country since the late 1800s.