The visit of U.S. Vice President JD Vance to Greenland on March 29, 2025, extends far beyond a routine diplomatic engagement. It provides significant insights into shifting global power dynamics, intensifying geopolitical competition in the Arctic, and the sovereignty struggles of small nations. Vance’s accusation that Denmark has been insufficient in safeguarding Greenland’s security indicates a shift in Washington’s Arctic policy towards a more overt and assertive stance.[1]
Although Vance stated that the United States does not intend to increase its current military presence in Greenland, he emphasized potential investments in the region’s resources via naval vessels and icebreakers.[2] This reveals a growing U.S. interest in Greenland, not solely for security but also for economic and strategic purposes. Rich in rare earth elements, natural gas, and oil, Greenland is increasingly emerging as a focal point in global strategic competition.
Greenland’s geopolitical importance is not new. During the Cold War, the U.S. operated 17 military installations on the island, supported by roughly 10,000 troops.[3] Although troop numbers have significantly decreased, the United States still maintains its presence through Pituffik Space Base, a site of vital importance for ballistic missile warning systems and located along the shortest air route between Europe and North America. Thus, Greenland retains its strategic military significance in today’s global security architecture.
Beyond military and geopolitical considerations, Greenland’s economic potential is a key driver of foreign interest, particularly due to its wealth of untapped underground resources.
Greenland attracts international attention not only due to its geographical location but also due to its rich underground resources. The island, which has significant potential worldwide, especially in terms of rare earth elements, attracts the attention of many global actors, especially the USA. These minerals, which are of critical importance in the production of electric vehicle batteries, wind turbines and advanced technology, make Greenland a strategic resource region in the future energy transformation. Despite this, serious infrastructure and investment requirements are evident in the current conditions for the economically efficient extraction and processing of these resources.
To date, mining operations in Greenland have primarily been led by firms based in Australia, Canada, and the United Kingdom, with the U.S. playing only a limited role. This limited engagement has prompted the American administration to pursue a stronger economic footprint in the region. U.S. officials have publicly highlighted that Greenland hosts the rare earth minerals essential for the “next generation of the American economy.”[4] Yet, the local population’s environmental concerns and skepticism regarding the exploitation of natural resources are important caveats. While Greenlanders welcome economic development, they demand it be carried out in a way that safeguards the environment and traditional ways of life.
Greenland’s mineral wealth thus holds profound implications not only for its local communities but also for the balance of power among global actors. Any investment strategy must account for environmental and social dimensions, in addition to economic returns. Failure to do so risks undermining trust between the local population and foreign stakeholders—jeopardizing regional stability and cooperation.
Although Vance’s criticisms of Denmark drew attention during his visit, he also argued that closer cooperation with the U.S. could lead to a more secure and economically empowered future for Greenland.[5] These remarks, however, were met with backlash both from Greenlandic citizens and Danish authorities. Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen described Vance’s statements as “unfair,” while Foreign Minister Lars Løkke Rasmussen stressed that U.S. engagement in the region remains limited, both historically and currently.[6]
Vance’s visit and rhetoric can be interpreted as an extension of the foreign policy posture seen during the Trump administration. In 2019, then-President Donald Trump publicly proposed the purchase of Greenland, triggering surprise and opposition across Denmark and the broader international community. Although such a proposal has not been explicitly reiterated, the Biden administration’s actions signal a renewed intent to increase influence and oversight in the region. This shift could potentially strain traditional alliances, such as NATO, and foster new geopolitical tensions.
Polls indicate that a clear majority of Greenlanders oppose the idea of joining the United States. Public protests have illustrated the population’s firm stance against such external pressures. The display of a banner reading “Our Land, Our Future” in Nuuk, Greenland’s capital, stands as a symbolic act of resistance and a collective assertion of sovereignty.
In light of recent developments, Greenland’s internal political landscape appears to be undergoing a significant transformation. Under the leadership of newly appointed Prime Minister Jens-Frederik Nielsen, the broad-based coalition government currently aims to maintain ties with Denmark. However, in the long term, there are growing signs of an aspiration toward independence. Nielsen’s call for national unity is seen as part of a broader effort to strengthen Greenland’s internal resilience in the face of external pressures.
As the Arctic becomes increasingly accessible due to climate change, geopolitical competition in the region is intensifying. Russia and China’s interests extend beyond access to energy resources; they also encompass new maritime trade routes and military advantages. Vance’s comment that “Chinese and Russian vessels are everywhere” reflects this reality, albeit often without robust empirical support.
Ultimately, Greenland’s future will not be determined solely by the strategic interests of global powers. The voices of Greenland’s people, international respect for sovereignty and law, and the effectiveness of regional cooperation frameworks will be decisive in shaping the island’s path forward. It is not only the role the United States intends to play, but how it chooses to play that role, which will determine its legitimacy and impact. In today’s complex global landscape, Greenland continues to assert itself as a small yet strategically significant actor with a distinct voice.
[1] Little, Tom, Leonhard Foeger, and Nandita Bose. “Vance Accuses Denmark of Not Keeping Greenland Safe from Russia, China.” Reuters, https://www.reuters.com/world/us-vice-president-vance-visit-greenland-island-trump-wants-control-2025-03-28/, (Date Accessed: 06.04.2025).
[2] Ibid.
[3] Ibid.
[4] Ibid.
[5] Ibid.
[6] Ibid.
