The U.S. administration has reiterated that "all options," including diplomatic approaches, remain under consideration regarding a potential acquisition of Greenland, a territory controlled by Denmark. This continued interest, cited by President Trump for strategic importance and rare earth mineral reserves, has drawn opposition from European leaders who affirm Greenland's sovereignty and raise concerns about NATO stability. Within the U.S. Congress, lawmakers have expressed varied views, with many questioning or opposing military intervention while exploring legislative measures to prevent it.
U.S. Administration's Position
White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt stated on Wednesday that President Trump's primary method has consistently been diplomacy when examining U.S. interests. She indicated that prior administrations have sometimes publicly outlined foreign policy strategies, but the current administration's approach differs in this regard. When questioned about ruling out military force for Greenland, Leavitt did not explicitly do so.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio affirmed President Trump's consistent interest in Greenland since his first term. Rubio also stated that "Every president retains the option" globally, rather than specifically for Greenland, adding that military intervention is not the administration's preference for Greenland.
President Trump's Rationale and Actions
President Trump has expressed interest in the United States acquiring Greenland since his first term in 2019. He has cited Greenland's strategic importance for U.S. Arctic priorities and its reserves of rare earth minerals. President Trump has also noted the presence of Russian and Chinese vessels around Greenland, asserting a U.S. national security interest in the territory and expressing doubt about Denmark's capacity to secure it. His interest reportedly reintensified following a U.S. operation in Venezuela.
On Saturday, President Trump announced an intention to impose a 10% import tax, beginning in February, on goods from eight European nations due to their opposition to his Greenland plans. He stated on social media that the "need to ACQUIRE is especially important" given modern weapons systems, publicly arguing that the U.S. should acquire Greenland before China or Russia.
International Reactions and Concerns
The U.S. administration's continued focus on Greenland has prompted responses from European nations. In a joint statement released Tuesday, leaders from Denmark, France, Germany, Italy, Poland, Spain, and the United Kingdom affirmed Greenland's sovereignty, stating it "belongs to its people." The statement emphasized that decisions concerning Denmark and Greenland are exclusively for their respective peoples and governments.
Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen and other European leaders have expressed opposition to the idea of a U.S. military acquisition, suggesting it could impact the NATO military alliance. President Trump addressed NATO tensions in a social media post on Wednesday, affirming U.S. support for the alliance. Some European nations have reportedly deployed troops to Greenland in support of Denmark.
Danish Foreign Minister Lars Løkke Rasmussen and Greenlandic counterpart Vivian Motzfeldt met with U.S. lawmakers to discuss potential collaboration on critical mineral industries and military cooperation. They indicated a lack of evidence regarding Chinese or Russian military activity in Greenland.
U.S. Congressional Perspectives
Responses within the U.S. Congress to the prospect of military intervention in Greenland have varied:
- House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) acknowledged Greenland's geopolitical and strategic importance to the U.S. However, he stated that the U.S. is "not at war with Greenland" and has "no reason to be," expressing skepticism regarding military action. He anticipated "thoughtful discussion" on the matter.
- Representative Michael McCaul (R) stated that any U.S. military intervention to acquire Greenland would conflict with NATO allies and could lead to the alliance's dissolution. He noted the U.S. possesses a treaty granting "full access" to protect Greenland and can deploy more military personnel without an invasion.
- Senator Thom Tillis (R-NC) criticized President Trump's tariff plans, describing them as "bad for America, bad for American businesses, and bad for America’s allies." He also criticized advisors for advocating "coercive action to seize territory of an ally." Senator Tillis participated in a bipartisan delegation trip to Denmark.
- Senator Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), also part of the delegation, commented that such dynamics could benefit Russia by diverting attention and resources from NATO allies.
- Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R) stated there is "certainly not an appetite" in Congress for military options.
- Former Republican leader Senator Mitch McConnell warned that any attempt to seize Greenland could impact relations with allies and the administration's foreign policy objectives.
- Representative Don Bacon (R-Nebraska) suggested that an invasion of Greenland could lead to impeachment proceedings, which he would consider supporting.
- Senator Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.) announced his intention to introduce a resolution to prevent President Trump from taking military action in Greenland.
- Senator Chris Coons (D-Del.) organized a bipartisan delegation trip to Denmark aimed at de-escalating tensions and fostering discussions on mutual military agreements in the Arctic region.
- Senator Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) asserted that the president's justification for obtaining Greenland as a national security measure is unfounded, citing assurances from Denmark and Greenland regarding security measures and an existing U.S. base with potential for expansion.
- Senator Mike Rounds (R) characterized the prospect of taking Greenland by force as a "hypothetical."
Lawmakers from both parties have indicated that U.S. interests in Greenland can be advanced while preserving the alliance with Denmark.
Potential Legislative Responses
U.S. lawmakers are exploring various legislative avenues in response to the discussions regarding Greenland:
- Prohibiting Department of Defense Funds: Proposed bills, supported by Republicans like Senator Murkowski, would prohibit the Department of Defense from using funds to attack or occupy territory belonging to NATO members without their consent.
- Nullifying Tariffs: Congress may consider nullifying the proposed tariffs, though past attempts to overturn tariffs have faced challenges.
- War Powers Resolutions: Democrats have pursued these resolutions to compel presidents to seek congressional approval before engaging in hostilities. Senator Tim Kaine (D-Va.) noted these resolutions can pressure Republicans and prompt the administration to provide briefings or commitments. However, Republican leaders have argued against such resolutions if no U.S. troops are currently deployed, potentially limiting their application.
- Cutting Military Funds: Senator Van Hollen suggested cutting funds for military purposes in Greenland as a potential course of action.