​Leave it alone: on the status of Greenland  

United States Vice President J.D. Vance’s recent visit to Greenland, where he reaffirmed U.S. President Donald Trump’s plan to assert control over the Arctic island, was a blunt demonstration of American power over a strategically vital territory inhabited by around 56,000 people. The visit drew sharp disapproval from Greenland’s local leaders and the Danish government, which retains sovereignty over the island. It marked a new low in U.S.-Greenland relations, which have soured in recent weeks. While Mr. Vance was inspecting the Pituffik Space Base (formerly Thule Air Base), Mr. Trump declared that the U.S. would “go as far as we have to” to take control of Greenland. This is not the first time that an American administration has attempted to acquire the island. In 1867, following the purchase of Alaska from Russia, the U.S. held unsuccessful talks with Denmark to buy Greenland. During the Second World War, after Nazi Germany occupied Denmark, the U.S. established military and radio stations on the island. In 1946, Washington offered Denmark $100 million for Greenland, which it rejected. More recently, during his first term, Mr. Trump made a similar offer, which was again declined by Denmark and Greenland. Now, in his second term, he is aggressively pursuing the idea, undeterred by the strong opposition from both sides of the Atlantic.

But the Greenland of today is different from the Greenland of the 19th or even the mid-20th century. Once a Danish colony, it was formally incorporated into the Kingdom of Denmark in 1953. After a 1979 referendum, it gained autonomy, with foreign affairs and defence under Danish control. Since then, nationalist sentiment has grown, with polls indicating over 80% of Greenlanders in support of full independence. In another survey, 85% of the population opposed becoming a part of the U.S. The American push for Greenland is rooted in geopolitical calculations. As climate change accelerates Arctic ice melt, the region is becoming more accessible for navigation and resource extraction. Only five countries have direct access to the Arctic seabed: Canada, Russia, Norway, Denmark (via Greenland), and the U.S. (via Alaska). Russia already maintains a strong military presence in the region. Washington sees control of Greenland as a way to expand its Arctic claims and access to untapped natural resources. But attempting to seize territory for strategic or economic gain echoes the behaviour of bygone empires. Mr. Trump’s expansionist ambitions risk further undermining the fragile post-war international order, which is grounded in principles of territorial integrity and national sovereignty. The U.S. should respect the will of the people of Greenland. Any change in the island’s status must come through the democratic choices of its residents, and not through external pressure or geopolitical gamesmanship.