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

The Changing Face of UK Holidays in 2023

Diane Hall
Sep 5, 2023
3 min read

Aerial Shot of Blackpool See front all lit up

The landscape of UK holidays is currently experiencing a transformation. The pandemic-fuelled boom in overseas holidays looks to be receding, leading to a resurgence of interest in staycations. This shift involves various factors, which include rising interest rates, inflation, and the unattractive prospect of blistering Mediterranean summers driven by climate change—all of which have breathed new life into the appeal of staycations along the milder British coastline.

During the pandemic, international travel restrictions and uncertainty surrounding foreign destinations saw many Brits turn their attention to domestic holiday options. Holiday-let companies flourished during lockdowns, providing a lifeline for those seeking a change of scenery within the confines of their own country. Coastal towns and rural areas, in particular, benefited from the influx of tourists looking for a taste of the seaside or a countryside retreat. The economic boost was significant, offering a silver lining amidst the challenges posed by the pandemic.

Ongoing concerns about health and safety during the pandemic also led people to prioritise destinations where they felt more in control of their environment. Familiarity with the healthcare system and sanitation standards in the UK was a reassuring factor during this time.

Once flying restrictions lifted and social distancing was no longer a priority, however, Brits flocked to foreign climes. This proved what is a common reaction—when you’re prevented from doing something or going somewhere, that’s all you want to do or visit.

Fast forward to 2023, and after a couple of post-pandemic trips abroad, some people have had their ‘fix’, and are now finding foreign travel less attractive an option than a UK staycation.

Whitby Pier looking upon Whitby Abby and St Marys Church

Let’s explore the factors that have contributed to this…

The raging wildfires and tourist evacuations across areas of Spain and Greece and the biblical downpours in such as Italy added an intriguing twist to the holiday landscape in 2023. These occurrences prompted some holidaymakers to reconsider their travel plans. Staycations, once viewed as a fallback option, once again gained recognition for their potential to provide a comfortable and enjoyable holiday experience.

Travelling within the UK often involves fewer logistical challenges compared to international trips. There's no need for passports, visas, currency exchange, or navigating foreign languages and customs, making domestic travel more convenient. Economic uncertainty, inflation, and rising interest rates have also made international travel more expensive. Domestic vacations can be more budget-friendly, especially when considering reduced travel distances and costs.

Whilst these factors have undoubtedly increased the appeal of UK holidays, an intriguing conspiracy theory has also emerged in some quarters and added more fuel to the fire. It revolves around the recent system failures within the air traffic control system, and it suggests that these disruptions may have been deliberate attempts from the powers-that-be to dissuade Brits from holidaying abroad.

The theory posits that if the experience of travelling abroad becomes uncomfortably stressful, more costly than anticipated, and potentially detrimental to holidaymakers’ jobs due to unforeseen delays and disruptions, staycations within the UK may seem like a more attractive and palatable option. This alleged deliberate interference with air travel is seen as a means to bolster domestic tourism and stimulate the economy by keeping holiday spending within the country, and it’s also purported to be another push towards 15-minute cities and a controlled population.

It’s important to note that such conspiracy theories lack substantial evidence and are often fuelled by speculation and conjecture. Authorities and experts in the aviation industry have already attributed said recent system failures to technical issues and operational challenges.

This is my stance: I went with my family to Malta at the beginning of the year, which was our first trip abroad since the pandemic. Whilst an enjoyable break, I can relate to the inference that UK holidays are less stressful, and I didn’t even experience the delays and frustration holidaymakers affected by the air traffic control debacle had to endure.

About the conspiracy theory mentioned above…I’m so distrusting of this government and the people who control our MPs and media that I can’t 100% dismiss it. So much of the diatribe the ‘tin foil hat brigade’ put forward in the early days of the pandemic has been proven to have had a ring of truth about it—so, what’s to say that, in twenty years’ time, we won’t say the same about this? The Tories are subtly pushing their 15-minute city agenda, where everything we need is on our doorstep and we will be forced to apply to leave our localities; this theory would underpin their long-term intentions.

Time will tell.