Why Greenland sparks a global power play: America, China, Russia, Europe face off

On Wednesday (August 27, 2025), Denmark summoned the US chargé d’affaires, Mark Stroh.

The move came following a report by Danish public broadcaster DR alleging that at least three US citizens with connections to President Donald Trump were conducting covert influence operations in Greenland.

'Unacceptable'

The report claimed these individuals were compiling lists of Greenlanders supportive or critical of US interests, cultivating ties with local politicians and businesspeople, and seeking information to portray Denmark negatively in American media.

Danish Foreign Minister Lars Løkke Rasmussen called such interference "unacceptable".

The diplomatic summons sought to address concerns over foreign meddling in Greenland, a semi-autonomous Danish territory.

Why Greenland is a hot issue

Four powers — US, Russia, China and Europe — are fully aware of Greenland's strategic, economic, and military value.

Among these are: Arctic shipping routes, untapped natural resources, and geo-strategic location in the rapidly changing Arctic region.

Let's break these values down:

• Geopolitics

  Situated in the Arctic between North America, Europe, and Russia, Greenland is critical for controlling Arctic shipping routes, especially as melting ice opens new passages. It hosts the US’s northernmost military base, Pituffik Space Base, vital for missile defense and satellite operations.

• Mineral wealth

  Greenland is rich in critical and rare-earth minerals, oil, and gas, making it economically attractive as global demand for these resources grows.

• Security, climate politics

  Its position in the Arctic makes it a focal point for great power competition, with the US, China, and Russia vying for influence, as well as climate change dynamics.

• Russia’s interest in Greenland is shaped by its desire to counter U.S. and NATO influence, secure economic opportunities, and maintain a foothold in the Arctic, a region it considers vital to its national and strategic interests.

• There are also concerns about China’s growing presence in Greenland, amplifying its strategic value.

Why the US and Trump are interested in Greenland

President Trump has repeatedly expressed interest in acquiring Greenland, citing:

• National security: Trump argues Greenland is essential for US and global security, pointing to its proximity to Russia and China’s maritime activities in the Arctic. He has suggested it could counter threats from adversarial powers.

• Economic opportunities: Greenland’s mineral wealth aligns with US interests in securing supply chains for critical materials. Trump’s allies in Big Tech could benefit from resource extraction.

• Hemispheric dominance: Trump’s interest is seen as as a move to block China and secure US influence in the Western Hemisphere, including control over Arctic routes.

• Military: Trump has not ruled out using military force, though Denmark and Greenland firmly reject any sale or annexation, straining NATO ally relations.

Are US-linked agents meddling in Greenland’s status?

Danish broadcaster DR reported that three Americans with ties to Trump were engaged in influence operations to weaken Denmark-Greenland ties, potentially to fuel a secessionist movement.

One allegedly compiled lists of pro- and anti-Trump Greenlanders, while others built networks with local elites.

The report, based on eight "unnamed" sources, couldn’t confirm if these actions were independently driven or directed by higher authority.

The US Embassy suggested the individuals acted on their own, but no conclusive evidence ties the operations directly to Trump’s orders.

Denmark’s intelligence service (PET) views Greenland as a target for such campaigns, exploiting existing tensions.

Possible outcome of this spat:

The worst-case scenario could involve:

• Escalation of tensions: Continued US interference could erode trust between NATO allies Denmark and the US, weakening alliance cohesion at a time of global security challenges.

• Destabilisation in Greenland: Influence operations could exacerbate local divisions, fostering unrest or a secessionist movement, undermining Greenland’s autonomy and Denmark’s sovereignty.

• Military posturing: Trump’s hints at using force, if acted upon, could lead to a diplomatic crisis or limited military standoff, though this is unlikely given NATO ties.

• Geopolitical fallout: A US push for control could embolden rivals like China or Russia to increase their own influence in the Arctic, escalating regional competition.

• Domestic backlash: In the US, public opposition (76% against annexation per an April 2025 poll) could fuel political controversy, while Greenlanders’ anger could lead to protests or anti-US sentiment.

What’s next after diplomatic spat?

• Diplomatic talks: Denmark will likely seek assurances from the US to halt any interference, with further meetings possible if new evidence emerges. Rasmussen expressed hope the claims can be refuted.

• Strengthened Greenland ties: Denmark is bolstering its relationship with Greenland, including military presence (e.g., a new Arctic Command HQ in Nuuk) and rallying European support, as seen with French President Macron’s visit in June 2025.

• US response: The US may clarify or distance itself from the alleged operations, possibly appointing a new ambassador (e.g., Ken Howery, pending Senate confirmation) to reset relations.

• Greenland’s stance: Greenland’s leaders, like former lawmaker Aqqaluk Lynge, emphasise unity and defiance against US pressure, likely pushing for stronger autonomy within Denmark.

• International attention: NATO and EU allies may mediate to preserve alliance unity, while monitoring Arctic competition from China and Russia.

What's next

Greenland’s critical role in Arctic security and resources makes it a flashpoint.

While the lack of conclusive evidence about the influence operations limits immediate escalation, the worst outcome — strained NATO ties or regional instability — remains possible but unlikely without further provocation.

Diplomatic efforts, Denmark’s reinforcement of Greenland’s ties, and US clarifications will shape the next steps.