Newsroom
From a proposed purchase to a permanent US security role
Donald Trump once wanted to buy Greenland. He later threatened to take the Danish territory by force. Now, the US president says Washington has secured a deal giving it permanent control over Greenland's security, while Denmark and Greenland insist that sovereignty remains where it is.
The agreement announced by Trump on Friday is expected to be signed by the United States, Denmark and Greenland during next week's United Nations General Assembly in New York. It will then have to pass the necessary parliamentary procedures before taking effect. The full text has not yet been published.
Trump's announcement marks a striking change in the form of his Greenland ambitions. His earlier demands centred on US ownership of the island, which he described as essential to American national security. The latest agreement does not transfer Greenland to the United States.
Instead, according to a US State Department official, Washington would receive permanent access, basing and overflight rights and the ability to build additional military facilities. The agreement would also prevent non-NATO countries from establishing military bases or maintaining troops on Greenland, while restricting certain sensitive investments by countries considered adversaries of the United States.
Trump has described the arrangement as giving the US "permanent control" over security in Greenland and said Washington would begin developing a larger military presence on the island.
Denmark and Greenland have presented the outcome differently.
Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen said the agreement recognises the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Kingdom of Denmark and Greenland's right to self-determination. Greenlandic Prime Minister Jens-Frederik Nielsen said the agreement recognises Greenland's interests and its place in international cooperation.
The distinction matters. Greenland is not being sold to the United States, but Washington is set to obtain an expanded security role in a territory whose strategic importance has made it a focal point of competition in the Arctic.
A NATO issue as much as a Greenland issue
The dispute has been closely watched in Europe because Denmark is a NATO member and Greenland is part of the Kingdom of Denmark.
The EU has repeatedly backed Copenhagen and Nuuk during the confrontation. In a joint statement issued in January, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and European Council President António Costa said territorial integrity and sovereignty were fundamental principles of international law. They also described peace and security in the Arctic as a shared transatlantic interest, including through NATO.
The EU statement came after Denmark conducted a pre-coordinated military exercise with allies in response to the security situation. Brussels said the exercise was intended to strengthen Arctic security and posed no threat to other countries.
European leaders also called for dialogue between Denmark and the United States and warned that tariffs threatened to damage transatlantic relations.
The new agreement therefore arrives with significance well beyond Greenland itself. It places US military access, Danish sovereignty and NATO's role in Arctic defence within the same framework.
NATO has already identified the Arctic as an increasingly important security region, while Denmark and other European allies have increased military activity and investment in the High North. Greenland's location between North America and Europe gives it particular strategic value for monitoring and defence across the North Atlantic.
What changes now?
The precise answer remains unclear until the agreement is published.
The United States already has extensive military rights in Greenland under a 1951 defence agreement with Denmark and operates the Pituffik Space Base in the northwest of the island. The new arrangement could therefore expand existing American capabilities rather than create an entirely new US military role.
A key reported provision would prevent Russia, China and other non-NATO countries from establishing military bases or maintaining troops in Greenland. Restrictions on investment in sensitive sectors would also give Washington a greater say over the island's strategic economic environment.
That gives the agreement a second dimension beyond military defence. Greenland possesses significant deposits of rare-earth and other critical minerals, making the island relevant to the competition over supply chains and strategic resources.
For Europe, the question is therefore not simply who controls Greenland. It is also how the United States and its European allies will manage security, investment and strategic competition in the Arctic without undermining the sovereignty principles the EU publicly defended when the dispute began.
For now, the answer is contained in an agreement whose full terms remain unpublished. What is clear is that Trump's campaign to acquire Greenland has produced a very different outcome: not American ownership of the island, but a potentially much stronger American security position inside a territory that remains part of the Kingdom of Denmark.
