Greenland at the Crossroads: Sovereignty, strategic interests and a modern colonial flashpoint

by Geopolitical Insights, Monthly Sub-feature

Greenland

Reading Time: | Word Count:

In January 2026, a geopolitical controversy erupted over Greenland, the world’s largest island, as the United States once again floated the idea of gaining control over the territory. What began as a strategic interest has sharply collided with questions of sovereignty, historical injustices, and global resistance to modern forms of colonial pressure.

Trump’s renewed push for greenland

Former US President Donald Trump revived a long-standing interest in Greenland, arguing it is essential for “national security” and strategic leverage in the Arctic. Trump even threatened punitive tariffs against European allies, including Denmark, if they resisted his demands for control over the island. This rhetoric provoked international alarm, drawing condemnations of “new colonialism” from European leaders and warnings that unilateral moves could fracture NATO unity.

Although Trump later downplayed the idea of outright annexation and claimed a “framework” with NATO for broader American access, Greenlandic and Danish leaders rejected any notion that the island could be ceded without their consent. They emphasised that only Greenland and Denmark have the authority to decide its future, underlining sovereignty and self-determination.

Global North pushback

The reaction from Europe and the wider North has been swift. Leaders from France, Germany, Britain, Italy, Spain, Poland and Denmark jointly stated that “Greenland belongs to its people” and reinforced collective security efforts in the Arctic. They underlined that defending the region’s stability should not involve coercive demands or threats against Denmark, a fellow NATO member.

Across Greenland and in Copenhagen, protests erupted under slogans such as “Greenland is not for sale” and “Hands off Greenland,” reflecting public outrage at perceived external pressure on their homeland.

How Greenland came under Danish control

Greenland has a long history, well before European colonialism. Inuit peoples inhabited the island for millennia before Danish missionary activity in the early 18th century marked the beginning of colonial rule. Denmark gradually asserted authority, formalising sovereignty in 1933 through international legal recognition after resolving a dispute with Norway.

After World War II, Denmark incorporated Greenland into its constitutional framework in 1953, ending its official colonial classification and giving it representation in the Danish Parliament. However, this integration occurred without a referendum by Greenland’s own people—a fact that still fuels debates about self-determination.

The island’s modern autonomy took shape through the Home Rule Act (1979) and the Self-Government Act (2009), granting extensive domestic authority, including control over many natural resources. Under these arrangements, Greenland can pursue full independence through a future referendum and Danish parliamentary approval.

Strategic importance and arctic geopolitics

Greenland’s position in the Arctic makes it strategically valuable. During the Cold War and beyond, the United States maintained military bases on the island under agreements acknowledging Danish sovereignty, recognising its role as a monitoring and defence site against external threats.

Today, Greenland’s mineral wealth, shipping routes emerging from climate change, and geopolitical location between North America, Europe, and the Arctic have heightened global interest. While some US officials frame involvement as a deterrent against rivals like Russia and China, Denmark and Greenland insist that cooperation must respect their sovereignty and people’s right to decide their own path.

The Greenland controversy has evolved into a symbolic and practical test of 21st-century sovereignty. As strategic competition in the Arctic intensifies, the island’s future will be shaped not by great-power designs but by the aspirations of its people and responsible international partnerships that respect their right to self-determination.

References

This piece was written for the January 2026 edition of Postscripts, Shamillah Wilson’s monthly round-up of what’s been happening in feminist circles, her work, and some recommended reading suggestions.

1 What is the radical imagination? A Special Issue. Max Haiven and Alex Khasnabish https://ojs.library.queensu.ca/index.php/affinities/article/view/6128/5793
Author: Lorelle Bell

Author: Lorelle Bell

This post was first published 26 January 2026.

Lorelle Bell is a South African writer, editor, feminist, and social justice activist with a background in media and communications, education, social justice, and human-centred design. With a deep commitment to Africa and people of global majority contexts. Lorelle crafts stories and thought pieces for clients, developing content that distils complex ideas into accessible, impactful messages.

share the post

WORKING TOGETHER

Let's have a call