What is the Greenland Crisis? Why the US Wants It

In early 2026, United States President Donald Trump has intensified calls for the acquisition of Greenland, a self-governing Danish territory, framing it as essential for national security.

During his address at the World Economic Forum in Davos on January 21, 2026, Trump stated that "no nation or group of nations is in any position to be able to secure Greenland other than the United States," while ruling out the use of military force but emphasizing immediate negotiations.

This rhetoric echoes Trump's 2019 proposal to purchase the island, which was dismissed by Danish officials, but has gained renewed urgency amid escalating global tensions.

Greenland's strategic value extends beyond its geographic position in the Arctic, it encompasses critical mineral resources, military positioning against rising threats from Russia and China, and potential economic stabilization in the face of U.S. dollar debasement.

This article examines these factors, drawing on the latest data from 2026, to elucidate the multifaceted rationale behind U.S. interest.



Geostrategic Positioning

Greenland's location in the Arctic Circle positions it as a pivotal asset in an increasingly contested region.

As ice caps are melting, new shipping routes such as the Northern Sea Route are opening, potentially reshaping global trade and military logistics.

Russia has expanded its military infrastructure in the Arctic, including radar installations and defense systems on islands like Novaya Zemlya, enhancing its area-denial capabilities.

According to a 2026 report from the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), Russia maintains 30 military sites in the Arctic, compared to 36 in NATO countries, underscoring the region's militarization.

China, despite not being an Arctic state, has pursued a "Polar Silk Road" strategy, collaborating with Russia on joint patrols, including a notable operation in the Bering Sea in 2024.

In 2026, NATO's Europe commander highlighted growing Sino-Russian cooperation as a threat, with joint naval and air activities testing Western defenses.

Trump's administration views Greenland as a counterweight, potentially hosting expanded U.S. facilities like Pituffik Space Base for missile warning and surveillance.

Notably, under existing agreements with Denmark, the United States already possesses the capability to establish additional military bases in Greenland if deemed necessary for defense purposes, as evidenced by the ongoing operations at Pituffik and historical precedents for U.S.-Danish cooperation in the region.

However, full acquisition would grant the U.S. sovereign control, eliminating dependencies on foreign approvals and enabling unrestricted development of infrastructure to deter adversaries more effectively.

In a hypothetical escalation toward World War III, the Arctic could serve as a strike vector for long-range missiles, with Greenland providing critical early warning capabilities against Eurasian threats. Greenland's role seems critical in deterring Russian and Chinese incursions.

$4.4 Trillion in Minerals

Greenland's untapped mineral wealth is a cornerstone of U.S. interest, particularly in the context of potential conflict with China.

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) estimates Greenland's rare earth element (REE) reserves at 1.5 million metric tons of proven resources, with potential estimates reaching up to 36 million metric tons, placing it eighth in global rankings.

Key deposits include Kvanefjeld, which holds approximately 11 million metric tons of REEs with ore grades of 1.43%, and Tanbreez, encompassing 28.2 million metric tons focused on heavy REEs.

Additionally, Greenland features significant uranium deposits in Kvanefjeld suitable for nuclear applications, alongside known reserves of copper essential for electrical infrastructure and graphite critical for battery production.

These minerals are indispensable for military technologies, including F-35 jets, satellites, and batteries, where China dominates 90% of global processing.

In a U.S. China war scenario, disruptions to Chinese-controlled supply chains could cripple U.S. defense production.

The 2025 USGS report indicates the U.S. is 100% import-dependent on 12 critical minerals, with China supplying over 50% of demand for 21 commodities.

Greenland's resources could diversify these chains, reducing vulnerability. Trump's push aligns with efforts to onshore processing, as seen in U.S. lobbying to prevent Chinese acquisition of Tanbreez in 2025.

Recent analyses suggest acquisition would secure these assets for U.S. firms, potentially benefiting investors like Jeff Bezos and Bill Gates, who hold stakes in Greenland mining projects.

Dollar Debasement

The U.S. dollar's ongoing debasement adds an economic layer to Greenland's appeal.

In 2026, forecasts predict a "V-shaped" trajectory, with the dollar index falling to 94 in Q2 before recovering to 100 by year-end, driven by Federal Reserve rate cuts and global growth.

Historical analogs suggest an additional 8% decline, amid persistent inflation and dedollarization trends.

Controlling Greenland's resources could provide hard assets to bolster economic resilience, potentially backing dollar stability through commodity reserves or reducing import dependencies.

In a dedollarized world, where BRICS nations challenge U.S. hegemony, Greenland's minerals offer a hedge. Acquisition costs, estimated at over $700 billion, would be taxpayer-funded, but long-term gains could accrue to corporations extracting resources.

This aligns with Trump's "America First" agenda, positioning the U.S. to counter China's mineral dominance and stabilize supply chains amid currency volatility.



Climate induced ice melt is exposing Greenland's resources and opening Arctic routes, amplifying its value.

By 2040, demand for critical minerals could quadruple for clean energy technologies.

Geopolitically, Trump's tariffs on European allies opposing acquisition, escalating to 25% by June 2026, risk NATO fractures.

Yet, supporters like Senator Ted Cruz argue it serves U.S. interests overwhelmingly.

The U.S. pursuit of Greenland in 2026 is driven by a confluence of security, resource, and economic imperatives.

Against Russian and Chinese Arctic advances, potential global conflict, and dollar debasement, Greenland offers strategic depth and mineral self-sufficiency.

However, the approach, blending coercion and negotiation, raises ethical and alliance concerns.

As Trump stated in Davos, "All the United States is asking for is a place called Greenland," but the implications extend far beyond.

Future policy must balance these gains with international norms, through the use of diplomacy, to avoid unintended escalations with allies.

Kai Tutor | The Societal News Team 18JAN2026