Why Greenland Matters to the United States, and Why Some People Are Sceptical

8 January 2026

Paul Francis

Want your article or story on our site? Contact us here

Greenland has become an increasingly prominent part of global geopolitical discussion, particularly in relation to the United States. On the surface, the interest can appear puzzling. Greenland has a small population, harsh conditions, and limited infrastructure. Yet for Washington, it represents one of the most strategically significant territories in the world.

Snow-covered mountains and rocky peaks rise above a deep blue sea, under a clear sky, creating a serene and majestic landscape.

At the same time, recent events elsewhere have led many observers to question whether security alone explains American interest in regions rich in natural resources. Greenland now sits at the intersection of strategic necessity and public scepticism.

Greenland’s strategic importance to US security

The primary and most consistently stated reason for US interest in Greenland is security.

Greenland occupies a crucial geographic position between North America and Europe. It sits along the shortest route for ballistic missiles travelling between Russia and the United States. This makes it essential for early warning systems and missile defence.

The US has maintained a military presence in Greenland since the Second World War. Today, Pituffik Space Base plays a key role in monitoring missile launches, tracking satellites, and supporting NATO defence architecture. These systems are designed to protect not only the United States but also its allies.

As Arctic ice continues to melt, the region is becoming more accessible to military and commercial activity. Russia has expanded its Arctic bases, and China has declared itself a near-Arctic state. From Washington’s perspective, maintaining influence in Greenland helps prevent rivals from gaining a foothold in a region that directly affects North Atlantic security.

The Arctic, climate change, and future competition

Climate change has transformed Greenland’s relevance. What was once largely inaccessible is now opening up.

New shipping routes could shorten trade paths between Asia, Europe, and North America. Scientific research, undersea cables, and surveillance infrastructure are all becoming more viable. Greenland’s location places it at the centre of these emerging routes.

For the United States, this makes Greenland less of a remote territory and more of a forward position in an increasingly contested region.

Red Mobil barrel secured with ropes on wood structure, against a cloudy sky. Blue pipes and rusty metal bar in background.

Oil and resource speculation as a secondary factor

While security dominates official policy discussions, resource speculation is often raised as an additional reason for interest in Greenland.

Greenland is believed to hold potential offshore oil and gas reserves, as well as deposits of rare earth elements, lithium, graphite, and other critical minerals. These materials are essential for electronics, renewable energy systems, and defence technologies.

It is important to note that Greenland currently restricts new oil and gas exploration licences, largely due to environmental concerns. Large-scale extraction remains difficult, expensive, and politically sensitive.

For the United States, oil is not a strategic necessity in Greenland. The country is already one of the world’s largest oil producers. However, critical minerals are a longer-term concern. The US remains heavily dependent on foreign supply chains, particularly from China, for many of these materials.

This makes Greenland attractive as a potential future partner rather than an immediate resource solution.

Why scepticism exists

Despite official explanations, scepticism persists, and not without reason.

In recent years, the United States has taken highly visible actions elsewhere that involved control over oil production and transport. These actions have reinforced a long-standing public perception that resource interests sometimes sit beneath security justifications.

The Iraq War remains a powerful reference point. Although the official rationale focused on weapons and security threats, the protection and control of oil fields became a defining feature of the conflict in the public imagination. That perception continues to shape how many people interpret US foreign policy today.

More recently, actions involving sanctions, tanker seizures, and control of oil revenues in other regions have revived these concerns. When military or economic pressure coincides with resource-rich territories, scepticism follows.

Against this backdrop, even legitimate security interests can be viewed through a lens of historical mistrust.

Greenland is not Iraq, but history shapes perception

Greenland differs significantly from past conflict zones. It is an autonomous territory within the Kingdom of Denmark, a NATO ally. The United States does not dispute Danish sovereignty and has repeatedly stated that Greenland’s future must be decided by its people.

US engagement in Greenland has focused on diplomacy, scientific cooperation, and defence partnerships rather than intervention. There has been no military conflict, no occupation, and no attempt to forcibly extract resources.

However, history matters. Public opinion is shaped not only by current actions but by patterns over time. When people see strategic interest combined with resource potential, they naturally draw comparisons.

Denmark’s role as a stabilising factor

Denmark plays a crucial role in shaping how Greenland is engaged internationally. As the sovereign state responsible for defence and foreign policy, Denmark ensures that US involvement occurs within established legal and diplomatic frameworks.

This partnership reduces the likelihood of unilateral action and helps keep Greenland’s development aligned with environmental standards and local governance.

The broader reality

Greenland’s importance to the United States is real, and it is primarily rooted in geography and defence. Resource speculation exists, but it is not the driving force behind current policy.

At the same time, scepticism is understandable. History has taught many people to question official narratives when strategic interests and natural resources overlap.

The truth lies in the tension between these two realities. Greenland matters because of where it is, what it enables, and what it may one day provide. How it is treated will determine whether it becomes a model of cooperation or another chapter in a long story of mistrust.

Greenland is not a prize to be taken, but a partner to be engaged. Whether that distinction holds in the long term will depend not just on policy statements, but on actions.

In a world shaped by climate change, great power competition, and historical memory, even legitimate interests must contend with the weight of the past.

Current Most Read

Why Netflix Is Circling Warner Bros, and How a Century-Old Studio Reached This Point

What Christmas 2025 Revealed About the Future of Consoles

China's Economic Slowdown: A Ripple Effect on the Global Economy

Connor Banks
Aug 12, 2024
2 min read

China, once the world’s economic powerhouse, is now facing a significant slowdown with profound implications for the global economy. This deceleration, driven by a combination of internal structural issues and external pressures, is causing concern among economists and business leaders worldwide.

The Roots of the Slowdown

The decline of China’s once-thriving property sector is a major factor in this economic downturn. The real estate market, which used to contribute as much as 25% to the country’s GDP, has seen a sharp decline due to a combination of oversupply, falling prices, and mounting debt. As property developers struggle, the effects are being felt across the economy, from construction firms to local governments that relied heavily on land sales for revenue.

Adding to the woes, China’s shift towards “high-quality growth”—a strategy focused on innovation and advanced productivity—has been slower and more challenging than anticipated. While sectors such as electric vehicles and green technology hold promise, the transition has been hampered by geopolitical tensions and supply chain disruptions. These challenges have slowed the expected economic transformation, leaving the country in a precarious position.

Global Economy Impact: A Chain Reaction

China’s economic slowdown is not just a domestic issue; it has significant global repercussions. As the second-largest economy in the world, China’s reduced demand for commodities is already affecting global prices. Countries such as Australia, which relies heavily on iron ore exports to China, are feeling the pinch as demand weakens. Similarly, Germany, a major exporter of industrial machinery to China, is witnessing a slowdown in its manufacturing sector.

Emerging markets, many of which have deep economic ties with China, are also vulnerable. Reduced Chinese investment and trade could lead to slower growth in these regions, exacerbating economic challenges and potentially leading to financial instability. Countries that have borrowed heavily from China, particularly under the Belt and Road Initiative, may face increased pressure to service their debts as China’s own economy tightens.

Financial Markets and Global Growth

The slowdown in China is causing ripples in global financial markets. Investors, wary of the potential for a more severe downturn, are pulling back from assets tied to Chinese growth. This has led to increased volatility in global markets, particularly in sectors heavily dependent on Chinese demand, such as commodities and technology.

Moreover, China’s reduced growth is likely to drag down global economic expansion. Even at lower growth rates, China’s contribution to global GDP is significant. A continued slowdown could therefore result in lower global growth, affecting employment, government revenues, and overall economic stability worldwide.

The Road Ahead

While China’s economic challenges are significant, they are not insurmountable. However, addressing them will require careful management of both domestic policies and international relations. The Chinese government faces the difficult task of rebalancing the economy away from property-driven growth towards more sustainable sectors, all while managing growing geopolitical tensions with major economic powers such as the United States and Europe.

For the global economy, China’s slowdown serves as a reminder of the interconnectedness of our world. What happens in Beijing and Shanghai has far-reaching effects, influencing everything from commodity prices in Australia to investment decisions on Wall Street. As China navigates this challenging period, the world will be watching closely, hoping that the country can steer its economy back to a stable and sustainable growth path.