January 23, 2026
Editor: Sudhir Choudhary, The Vagabond News
Greenland’s strategic importance to the United States has deep historical roots stretching from the Second World War into today’s tense geopolitical climate, resurfacing most recently in President Donald Trump’s controversial push for a “framework of a future deal” over the island. What may look like a new episode in American foreign policy actually draws on patterns shaped by global conflict, Cold War imperatives and shifting power rivalries.
Greenland’s Strategic Emergence in the 20th Century
The United States’ interest in Greenland began long before contemporary political disputes. During World War II, after Denmark was occupied by Nazi Germany, Washington assumed responsibility for defending the island — a move aimed at denying the Nazis a foothold from which to threaten Allied shipping lanes and air routes. Beginning in 1941, the U.S. established air and sea facilities, signal stations and weather stations across Greenland, integrating it into the Allied defense network against Axis powers. This early military presence underscored how Greenland’s location could influence trans-Atlantic warfare and broader Allied strategy.
After the war, as the Cold War materialized, Greenland retained its strategic salience. The island’s position near the GIUK Gap — the maritime and air choke point formed with Iceland and the United Kingdom — made it vital to monitoring Soviet air and naval movement into the North Atlantic. In 1951, the United States secured defense rights that permitted expanded military activities on the island, reinforcing Greenland’s role in Western defense networks.
During this period, U.S. military planners even considered ambitious projects such as Project Iceworm, a top-secret initiative to build a network of mobile nuclear missile sites under Greenland’s ice sheet. Although never realized, the program illustrated how deeply American strategists valued Greenland’s potential leverage against Soviet nuclear forces.
A Historical Pattern of Acquisition Attempts
American interest in Greenland has not been limited to military cooperation. Longstanding proposals to acquire the territory through purchase or treaty date back to the 19th century. Soon after the U.S. purchase of Alaska, officials explored the possibility of buying Greenland — partly for its natural resources and partly as an extension of geopolitical ambition. Subsequent approaches occurred in the early 20th century and most notably in the aftermath of World War II, when the United States offered $100 million to Denmark for Greenland — a proposal ultimately rejected.
These efforts reflect a recurring American view of Greenland as both a strategic asset and a geopolitical prize — a mindset rooted in hemispheric defense doctrines that prioritize control of key territories to safeguard national interests.
The Soviet Era and Arctic Geopolitics
Throughout the Cold War, Greenland functioned as a linchpin of U.S. and NATO defense strategy against Union of Soviet Socialist Republics threat vectors. Early warning radar installations and air monitoring operations emerged as core components of collective Western security frameworks. With the Soviet Union’s extensive bomber and submarine capabilities, controlling Greenland’s airspace offered the West a critical early detection advantage.
In this context, American interest was less about territorial expansion and more about deterrence and alliance strengthening. Nevertheless, the defense posture underscored Greenland’s role as a frontline in larger East-West rivalries.
Trump’s Renewed Focus: Reviving Old Narratives
In recent years, President Donald Trump revived Greenland as a geopolitical flashpoint. In separate negotiations, including discussions at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Trump described progress on a “framework of a future deal” to secure broader U.S. access to the territory — an initiative framed around national security and the need to counter growing Russian and Chinese influence in the Arctic.
Trump’s rhetoric has included proposals that would have the United States exercise “total access” to Greenland, though Danish and Greenlandic leaders maintain that sovereignty cannot be compromised. European allies have reacted cautiously, emphasising that Greenland — a self-governing part of the Kingdom of Denmark — is not for sale and insisting any cooperation must respect territorial integrity.
Analysts note that although the specifics of the Trump administration’s framework are still evolving, the strategic logic harks back to earlier eras: securing a key piece of Arctic geography that has historically served as a launch point for defense and surveillance operations, particularly against perceived great-power rivals.
Geopolitical Continuities and Contemporary Debates
The renewed focus on Greenland has reignited debates about great-power competition in the Arctic. With climate change opening new maritime routes and exposing previously inaccessible resources, Greenland’s importance in global geopolitics has arguably intensified beyond traditional military considerations.
Yet critics argue that framing Greenland primarily through strategic utility risks sidelining indigenous voices and self-determination — a lesson learned from earlier centuries of territorial ambitions. Today’s discussions reflect not only Cold War continuities but also modern contestations over sovereignty, resource rights and alliance management.
As Washington, Copenhagen and Nuuk navigate these complexities, one thing is clear: Greenland’s geopolitical magnetism — forged in the crucible of global conflict and great-power rivalry — remains as compelling now as it was during the era of Nazis, Soviets and early Cold War strategists.
Sources: One News Page; Reuters; historical military archives and academic analyses
Tags: Greenland, Arctic geopolitics, Donald Trump, Cold War, World War II, U.S. foreign policy, sovereignty
News by The Vagabond News
