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

Navigating AI Uncertainties: Examining Fears Surrounding ChatGPT

Diane Hall
Sep 25, 2023
5 min read

Me to ChatGPT: Please write an 800-word article on the fears some people have around ChatGPT and what its incorporation into content creation may mean

ChatGPT: Navigating the Uncertainties: Understanding the Fears Surrounding ChatGPT and Its Impact on Content Creation

Introduction

In the realm of artificial intelligence, few innovations have captured the public's imagination quite like ChatGPT. Developed by OpenAI, ChatGPT is a powerful language model capable of generating human-like text responses to a wide range of prompts and queries. While this technology represents a remarkable leap forward in the field of AI, it has also sparked fears and concerns among some people. In this article, we will explore the apprehensions surrounding ChatGPT and what its incorporation into content creation may mean for the future.

Fear of Misinformation

One of the primary fears surrounding ChatGPT is its potential to generate and spread misinformation. As ChatGPT can produce text that sounds convincingly human, there is a risk that it may be used to craft false narratives, fake news, or misleading content. This fear is not unfounded, as we have already witnessed instances where AI-generated text has been used to fabricate stories or manipulate public opinion.

To mitigate this risk, it is essential for developers and users of ChatGPT to exercise responsibility and ethical restraint. Fact-checking and verifying information generated by AI tools should become the norm. Additionally, ongoing research and improvements in AI should focus on reducing the model's propensity to produce misleading or false information.

AI robot hand touching and working on keyboard

Job Displacement Concerns

The incorporation of ChatGPT and similar AI technologies into content creation also raises concerns about job displacement. Many writers, journalists, and content creators worry that the widespread adoption of AI-generated content may lead to a decline in demand for human writers, ultimately resulting in job losses.

While it is true that AI can automate certain aspects of content creation, such as generating product descriptions or news summaries, it is unlikely to replace the creative and nuanced work of human writers entirely. Instead, AI can complement human creativity by handling repetitive tasks, freeing up writers to focus on higher-level, creative aspects of their work. Content creators should view AI as a tool to enhance their productivity rather than as a threat to their livelihoods.

Bias and Ethical Concerns

Another prevalent fear associated with AI models like ChatGPT is the perpetuation of bias and ethical concerns. AI models learn from the data they are trained on, and if this data contains biases or discriminatory patterns, the model may reproduce these biases in its responses. This has the potential to reinforce stereotypes, discrimination, and inequality in content generated by ChatGPT.

To address this issue, developers must prioritize bias mitigation and ethical considerations in the training and deployment of AI models. Robust testing, ongoing monitoring, and transparency in the development process can help ensure that AI-generated content is free from bias and adheres to ethical guidelines. Furthermore, user education and awareness can play a crucial role in recognizing and addressing bias when it arises.

Loss of Human Touch

Another fear some people have is that AI-generated content lacks the human touch and authenticity that is essential in various forms of communication. Whether it's a heartfelt letter, a piece of art, or a story, the human element brings depth, emotion, and connection to these creations. There is a concern that relying too heavily on AI-generated content may lead to a loss of this essential human touch in our interactions.

While AI can mimic human language and generate text, it cannot replicate the genuine emotions, experiences, and unique perspectives that make human creations special. To preserve the human touch, it is crucial to strike a balance between AI automation and human creativity. AI should be seen as a tool that enhances efficiency and creativity rather than a complete replacement for the human element.

Privacy and Data Security

Privacy and data security are significant concerns when it comes to AI-powered technologies like ChatGPT. Users worry that their personal data and conversations may be harvested and exploited for various purposes, including targeted advertising or surveillance. The fear of AI models mining private conversations and sensitive information is a valid one.

To alleviate these concerns, AI developers and organizations must prioritize user privacy and data protection. Implementing robust data encryption, ensuring clear user consent, and adhering to strict data handling practices can help build trust in AI technologies. Regulatory frameworks and guidelines must also evolve to keep pace with the advancements in AI and safeguard user data.

Conclusion

While ChatGPT and similar AI models hold great promise for content creation and communication, it is essential to acknowledge and address the legitimate fears and concerns that surround their use. Misinformation, job displacement, bias, loss of the human touch, and privacy issues are valid worries that require careful consideration and proactive measures.

The responsible development and deployment of AI technologies like ChatGPT are critical to ensure that they benefit society without causing harm. By prioritizing transparency, ethical guidelines, and user education, we can harness the power of AI while mitigating its potential risks. Ultimately, it is our collective responsibility to navigate the uncertainties and shape a future where AI augments human creativity and communication, rather than replacing it.

Me: Now, that’s not a bad piece of content. I don’t like the way some phrases are worded, but they’re easy enough to change as I read through and even in its raw state, it does the job.

According to a plagiarism checker, however, this generated response has ripped off 27% of its wording. To be fair, I think that’s the highest ever result I’ve seen using this tool; most articles I ask ChatGPT to create fall below the threshold for acceptable/natural plagiarism (15%). Regardless, this is easy to rectify; the tool highlights the potentially plagiarised sections for me, and it wouldn’t take me longer than a couple of minutes to reword those sentences to reduce this percentage.

The time it took me to generate the response was less than a minute. Even with my commitment to a good edit and tackling that higher-than-normal plagiarism, a completely acceptable and easily readable article will have taken me 15 minutes to produce.

Before ChatGPT, a similar article would have taken me around an hour to write, then a further half-an-hour to tweak, and that may not have included the time taken to come up with and research my article’s angle.

Given the response above is in its raw form, you may think that it’s robotic and dry to read. To edit it into a readable piece really doesn’t take long—and it mainly concerns the beginning and ending of the article.

The upshot is that my productivity has more than doubled since CharGPT came along (tripled, maybe).

I really can’t understand why some people haven’t used it, as it has so much potential. Providing a first draft like that above is only a small part of what it can do.