Strategic Implications of Trump’s Greenland Agenda 

Сумма расклада планов Трампа в Гренландии

The resolve of US President Donald Trump concerning Greenland and the Arctic is poised to intensify amidst growing uncertainties in artificial intelligence (AI) investments, which are critical to advancing microelectronics, the automotive sector, and other high-technology industries. There has been a de facto ideological collapse of the foundational framework that once underpinned the US economic growth strategy, particularly the unchecked capitalization of the AI bubble. In fact, DeepSeek and Qwen appear to transcend mere business projects, instead functioning as components of a broader Chinese information-psychological operation whose full ramifications remain to be seen.

From a long-term strategic perspective, the US aims to achieve complete independence from China in the supply of rare earth elements while marginalizing Russia’s influence in northern regions. This strategy prioritizes securing a dominant position in the Arctic while simultaneously denying such advantages to the European Union. Such objectives echo the geopolitical dynamics of the Cold War, where control over strategic territories was paramount. Despite lacking direct access to the Arctic, China has actively engaged in the region through initiatives like the Polar Silk Road, further underscored by its significant role in Greenland’s economy, accounting for 24% of its exports.

The Northwest Passage, increasingly navigable due to Arctic ice melt, is expected to become a focal point for US trade and military interests. The US seeks to undermine the strategic value of Russia’s Northern Sea Route, potentially leveraging sanctions and coercive measures to achieve this end. By bolstering its presence in the Arctic, the US aims to recalibrate the regional power balance, which is currently tilted in favor of Russia and China as they consolidate their influence in this emerging macro-region.

To achieve this goal, the US is leveraging the capabilities of its Thule Air Base (Pituffik) in Greenland. Plans to modernize the base, including the deployment of nuclear-capable F-35 fighter jets, are intended to enhance the US military footprint in the Arctic. Additionally, the US has initiated the construction of approximately 40 icebreakers, modernized NORAD (North American Aerospace Defense Command), and advanced the development of an Arctic drone fleet.

Greenland’s residents, who do not strongly identify with Danish historical background, may align with the dominant power in the event of escalating tensions. The Trump administration’s strategy appears to eschew cultural diplomacy in favor of a large-scale hybrid operation. This approach would likely begin with provocations designed to stoke Greenlandic independence sentiments, followed by efforts to integrate Greenland into the US as a state or associated territory under the guise of “voluntary” consent. However, the influence of pro-Swedish elites, who adeptly leverage environmental advocacy, poses a significant challenge, so the US plan risks failure without forceful support. Success, however, could accelerate the disintegration of the EU’s globalist coalition — a desired outcome for Trump — and undermine the dominance of the left-liberal political establishment the EU, whose legitimacy is already in question.

Fundamentally, Trump’s strategy seeks to take the bread out of the mouths of his sworn adversaries —the inclusive elites of the Nordic bloc and France. Given the sheer disparity in military capabilities between the US and these coalitions, asymmetric tactics are anticipated. These may include the mobilization of proxy actors, such as human rights lobbies within the UN and Congress, as well as the use of NGOs to fuel protest sentiments and foment destabilization, particularly in the context of economic decline and rising ethnic tensions in the US.

The reconfiguration of Arctic geopolitics is emerging as a catalyst for profound and far-reaching developments across both the American and European continents.

Loading...
Ralph Henry Van Deman Institute for Intelligence Studies