President Donald Trump ramped up his proposal in recent days that the United States control Greenland. The world’s largest island is currently claimed by Denmark and has been since the Kingdom of Denmark-Norway dissolved in 1814.
Michael Desch, a professor of political science and director of the O'Brien Notre Dame International Security Center, explained that Greenland is simultaneously a subordinate of Denmark and maintains a level of self-governance over its largely indigenous population.
According to Desch, Greenland's largest asset is its geographic location, and has been since World War II. He shared that historically, it served as a refueling stop for aircrafts and during the Cold War it housed the Far Eastern leg of the United States’ defense early warning radar system — constructed to detect Soviet bombers flying over the North Pole. Later, the system was upgraded to parallel a technological shift from bombers to missiles and space reconnaissance.
Today, the United States’ Pituffik Space Base, formerly Thule Air Base, operates in northern Greenland.
Desch said the conversations surrounding Greenland have become more pronounced in recent years. Climate change has increased the navigability of the Arctic Ocean and opened exploratory efforts to find rare earth metals and strategic materials. Still, he believes the long-standing significance of the region remains with its early warning radar capabilities.
George Lopez, a professor in the Kroc Institute for International Peace Studies, said U.S. involvement in Greenland would ruin relations with Denmark — a country he noted was quick to step up and enact Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization on Sept. 11, 2001, when the United States was in need of support.
The article states that an attack on one NATO country is attack on all nations under the treaty.
Asher Kaufman, a professor in the Kroc Institute for International Peace Studies, described the conversations generated around Greenland as “mind boggling,” adding, “it is an example of the end of the international system as we knew it only a year ago.”
Citing the President’s 2025 national security strategy, Desch believed the Trump administration has become heavily concerned with hemispheric defense.
“Greenland, in a way, is something of an anomaly. There are islands in the Caribbean that have a similar sort of relationship with extra hemispheric countries, but Greenland is the biggest chunk of territory that has sovereignty outside the Western hemisphere,” Desch said.
A recent survey by Verian returned mixed opinions by Greenlanders for remaining a part of Denmark or become independent. However, only 6% of people were found to be in favor of becoming a part of the United States.
Other foreign nations expressed discontent at the idea of any American designs for the island. Susanne Wengle, an associate professor in the department of political science, noted all NATO members would object to an occupation effort, though some European powers may benefit.
“The U.S., under Trump, would be handing Putin an absolute victory,” she said of the occupation. “It would also de facto legitimize Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, and in general align with the Russian approach to power politics,” Wengle wrote in a statement.
Logistical questions remain on how a transfer of power would take place. While in the beginning of the Greenland discussion, President Trump said the transfer could be done with force, but he has since refined his position to be against using force.
Joseph Parent, professor of political science, does not forsee the United States using force in Greenland.
“No state has the will or capability to inflict more than symbolic violence on a Greenland takeover. But the illegality of it has repercussions around the world. If this is what it means to be a US ally, who needs friends? If this is how one takes over a territory, Taiwan has even greater problems,” Parent said.
