How to ‘Lose’ Greenland

By Andrew Stuttaford

Tuesday, January 06, 2026

 

Rich Lowry rightly argues that the U.S. should not annex Greenland. And we should not, unless this is something to which the Greenlanders and, for so long as Greenland continues to be part of Denmark, Denmark freely agree. How about a Greenland Purchase? Sure, if it is between willing buyer and seller(s). As Rich notes, Greenland’s position and its resources mean that it is well worth having, but simply grabbing the place is not the way to go. For the administration to even be talking about such a move is counterproductive. It is alienating the Greenlanders, and its is alienating Denmark, an ally. Denmark fought in both the Iraq and Afghan wars, losing soldiers in both. It participated in the fierce fighting in Helmand province, and its army only quit Afghanistan in June 2021.

 

The argument over Greenland is also adding to the strains within NATO, and there are enough of those as it is. However slight the force that would be required to take Greenland, it would probably be enough to shatter the Atlantic Alliance, an alliance which, despite President Trump’s legitimate complaints about free riding (which are finally being resolved), has served this country very well. Xi and Putin would be thrilled.

 

Moreover, even talking about seizing Greenland is making it less likely that Denmark and Greenland would agree to the deepening of a relationship with the U.S. of a type that would yield the military and other strategic results that this country should be looking for. Given goodwill on all sides, such a process could one day be taken a very long way, perhaps even as a far as an arrangement modeled on the Compact of Free Association that the U.S. has with Micronesia, Palau, and the Marshall Islands. Henry Olsen discussed this option on this site early last year.

 

The administration should also remember that the worse it behaves, the better — however misleading that would be — that China might appear to the Greenlanders, and China is certainly interested in what’s there.

 

There is also the fact that Greenland is not the only large, strategically located and sparsely populated island under Nordic control in the High Arctic. Svalbard, which is about the size of Belgium, is fully a part of Norway, but under the terms of a 1920 treaty, it is largely demilitarized and certain countries, including the U.S., Denmark, and Russia have rights of access (Americans can, under certain circumstances live there!). Its population is around 2,500, with the two largest groups being made up of Norwegians — and Russians. A glance at the map reveals why its location matters to Russia’s northern fleet (which is based north of Murmansk) and is another reason the U.S. should want to remain on good terms with its Arctic allies.