U.S. President Donald Trump has announced a framework for a future deal on Greenland and the Arctic region at Davos. He emphasized it is for security reasons, though ambitions over natural resources are evident. This marks a retreat from his earlier aggressive stance.
Donald Trump first floated the idea of U.S. control over Greenland during his initial term. He canceled a visit to Denmark after Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen stated that Greenland was 'not for sale.' In early January 2025, at the start of his second term, Trump renewed the demand, threatening high tariffs on Denmark and not ruling out military force.
In mid-January 2026, the White House proposed a 10% tariff on goods from eight European countries starting February 1, rising to 25% on June 1, until a Greenland agreement was reached. However, at the recent World Economic Forum in Davos, Trump retreated from this tough stance, announcing 'the framework of a future deal with respect to Greenland and, in fact, the entire Arctic region.' He described the deal's timeframe as 'infinite' and noted ongoing discussions, including the Golden Dome missile defense plan, a $175 billion system to position U.S. weapons in space.
The Trump administration covets Greenland for its strategic location and natural resources. At Davos, Trump stated that it is rightful for the U.S. to 'have' Greenland 'for security [and not] anything else.' Commenting on Arctic exploration challenges, he noted, 'You have to go 25ft down through ice to get it. It’s not something that a lot of people are going to do or want to do.' The White House claims expanding Russian and Chinese influence in the region, unsubstantiated by intelligence reports, especially as Greenland is under NATO's security umbrella.
Under the 1951 U.S.-Denmark pact, security threats to the Arctic territory could legally trigger expanded U.S. military presence. Washington stationed nearly 10,000 troops on the island during the Cold War, compared to only about 200 currently. Greenland holds considerable reserves of oil and natural gas, plus raw materials vital for military technologies, electronics, and clean energy. Reports indicate 25 of the 34 minerals deemed 'critical raw materials' by the European Commission are present, including graphite and titanium.
Some U.S. lawmakers argue the push protects national security interests in shipping lanes, energy, and fisheries, but the true motivation likely involves bargaining for resource extraction. The 'framework of a future deal' Trump mentioned at Davos is heavy on rhetoric but light on details. His meeting with NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte did not address Danish sovereignty over Greenland. Any agreement acceptable to Trump might cede partial control over certain territories, akin to the U.K.'s military bases in Cyprus.
Trump's climbdown from aggression was likely prompted by the risk of a judicial ruling against using the International Emergency Economic Powers Act for tariffs on allies, plus threats of EU counter-tariffs impacting U.S. tech firms. Broader concerns persist about potential U.S. interference in the politics of Denmark and other nations.
