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

Why British Heatwaves Feel Hotter Than They Are

Connor Banks
Jul 1, 2025
3 min read

Every summer, a familiar complaint echoes across Britain: Why does this heat feel so unbearable?

Even when temperatures stay lower than those in Spain or Italy, British heatwaves often feel surprisingly oppressive. The reasons are rooted in the unique blend of Britain’s climate, urban design, and human physiology, with a healthy dose of psychology thrown in.

Britain: Built for Cold, Not Heat

Coastal view with red-roofed houses overlooking a calm sea under a blue sky. A lighthouse stands on a pier, with scattered clouds above.

Britain’s housing stock was designed for a cool, damp climate. Historically, keeping warm was the priority, not staying cool.

Heat-Trapping Buildings: Many homes use materials like brick, stone, and concrete, which absorb heat during the day and release it slowly at night. In winter, that’s helpful. In summer, it turns houses into slow-cooking ovens.
Insulation and Small Windows: Homes are insulated to conserve heat, and older designs often feature small windows that limit ventilation.
Lack of Air Conditioning: Unlike hotter countries, air conditioning remains rare in British homes and many public buildings. During a heatwave, there’s often nowhere to cool off.

All these factors mean that once heat enters British buildings, it’s hard to get it out.

Urban Heat Islands: Cities That Can’t Cool Down

British cities suffer from what scientists call the Urban Heat Island effect.

Dark Surfaces: Materials like tarmac and concrete absorb more sunlight than natural landscapes and radiate heat back into the air.
Reduced Green Space: Trees and plants cool cities through shade and evaporation. Urban development often replaces these with hard surfaces, intensifying heat.
Heat from Human Activity: Cars, buses, and even electronics add extra heat to urban air.

During heatwaves, cities like London can be several degrees hotter than surrounding rural areas, especially at night, when trapped heat struggles to escape. This makes sleeping difficult, leaving people tired and less able to cope with heat stress the next day.

The Weather Whiplash Factor

One of the UK’s defining weather traits is how quickly it changes.

Britain sits at the crossroads of several major air masses:

Cool, moist Atlantic air from the west
Hot, dry air from continental Europe to the south and southeast
Polar maritime air from the north

The position of the jet stream — a fast-moving river of air high in the atmosphere — determines which air mass dominates. During a heatwave, a strong area of high pressure often parks over the UK, blocking cooler Atlantic systems. But the jet stream can shift suddenly, sweeping in cooler air and ending a heatwave almost overnight.

This means British people can go from 33°C one day to 19°C and drizzle the next. Such wild swings give no time for the body to gradually adjust.

Humidity Makes It Worse

A common misconception is that British heatwaves are always dry. In reality, some arrive with high humidity, depending on where the hot air comes from.

Atlantic Influence: Hot air drawn from the southwest often carries significant moisture from the ocean.
Sweat Struggles: Humidity slows down the evaporation of sweat, the body’s natural cooling system. Even temperatures around 28–30°C can feel stifling if the humidity is high.

This explains why moderate British heat can sometimes feel more exhausting than higher, dry heat in places like Spain.

Colorful beach huts in red, yellow, green, and blue line a sunny coastal pathway. Shadows cast diagonal patterns on the ground.

We’re Just Not Used to It

Humans adapt surprisingly well to heat if given time. People in warmer countries:

Start sweating earlier during heat exposure
Produce more sweat
Have lower heart rates and less strain under heat stress

In Britain, heatwaves are still relatively rare. Most people simply aren’t physiologically or psychologically acclimatised to handle high temperatures.

There’s also a cultural dimension. In Mediterranean countries, summer heat is normal. Daily life adapts with siestas, shaded streets, and social expectations to slow down. In Britain, people try to carry on as usual — until trains slow down, roads melt, and newspapers scream about record-breaking temperatures.

Climate Change: Turning Up the Heat

Climate change is making British heatwaves longer, hotter, and more frequent. In July 2022, Britain surpassed 40°C for the first time in recorded history. Events once considered “freak weather” are becoming part of the new normal.

Yet infrastructure, housing, and social habits have barely caught up. Without adaptation, the effects of heatwaves on health, productivity, and quality of life will only worsen.

British Heatwaves: The Bottom Line

British heatwaves feel more severe than the thermometer suggests because the country’s buildings, cities, and people simply aren’t built for sustained heat. And with climate change raising the stakes, it’s a challenge the UK can no longer afford to ignore.