Since we published “The Case for Greenland,” where I describe a comprehensive framework for America “acquiring” the territory — the many reasons it makes sense for all nations involved, strategies for making the deal a reality, etc. — a lot has happened (but no, Greenland is still not going to become a state). So much that it seems that, in spite of Greenland’s decision to continue demanding sovereignty, or maybe because of it, a free-association-type deal focused on economics and defense like the one I described in my piece doesn’t appear to be out of the question. Greenland is not happy with the status quo under Denmark, they want out sooner rather than later, and, while definitely not “for sale” per se, the territory has initiated talks with Trump and is keen on reaching some sort of agreement with America.

Let’s get oriented: on December 22nd, 2024, a day before we published my piece, Donald Trump posted on Truth Social that “For purposes of National Security and Freedom throughout the World, the United States of America feels that the ownership and control of Greenland is an absolute necessity.” This comment instigated most of what has come to pass since then. The next day, Greenland Prime Minister Múte Egede plainly responded that Greenland is “not for sale.” And on Christmas Eve, clearly nervous about Trump’s overtures, Danish Defense Minister Troels Lund Poulsen announced an “extra budget of double-digit billion krones” for increased defense measures in the Arctic.

That’s that, then, right? Greenland’s not interested, Denmark is picking up their slack, case closed, everybody goes home? Not quite.

On New Year’s Day, 2025, Greenland Prime Minister Múte Egede gave a major speech that basically upended the current state of Greenlandic-Danish relations and opened the door for an expansionist Trump administration to initiate negotiations.

Egede made several subtle (and not-so-subtle) references to the American offers and Greenland’s openness to exploring them in this landmark address. He said, among other things, that “new opportunities oblige us… to improve and shape our future and our country” and that Greenland must develop stronger cooperation, “especially with our neighboring countries.” Characterizing current relations with Denmark as “obstacles to cooperation” and “shackles of the colonial era,” the Greenlandic Prime Minister made it clear that the territory’s affairs “cannot continue to take place solely through Denmark.” He said that Greenland is “open to cooperation” with respect to the “great interest in our country from the outside world,” an obvious hat-tip to the American government. He stressed, however, that Greenland values its journey toward independence, saying that “our country will always be ours.”

January 6th, Trump escalated matters by saying he would “tariff Denmark at a very high level” if it tried to interfere with America’s attempts to get more involved with Greenland. He then reiterated that “[Denmark] should give [Greenland] up, because we need it for national security.” January 7th, temperatures rose even higher when Trump declined to promise he wouldn’t use economic or military force to take control of Greenland or the Panama Canal. “No, I can't assure you on either of those two,” he said, citing the presence of Chinese and Russian ships in the Arctic as a non-negotiable call-to-action. (Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen said, at that time, that she did not believe America would use any economic or military coercion.)

That same day, Donald Trump Jr. landed in Nuuk, Greenland’s capital and largest city. While the country’s government said the visit was unofficial, Trump posted that “Don Jr. and [his] Reps” were in Greenland, adding a classic “This is a deal that must happen. MAGA. MAKE GREENLAND GREAT AGAIN!” Danish media subsequently reported that Don Jr.'s team offered homeless Greenlanders free meals in exchange for appearing in a video and wearing MAGA hats, which was meant to be some sort of takedown, but in fact these individuals were a small part of a larger group who came into a diner (and out of the cold) for the event.

With the situation intensifying by the day, Danish PM Mette Frederiksen requested a meeting with Trump on January 9th. This is contextualized by an Axios scoop that the Danes had, in days prior, been sending “private messages” to the incoming Trump admin “expressing willingness to discuss boosting security in Greenland or increasing the U.S. military presence on the island.” This development likely reflects a growing realization within Denmark that the idea of Greenland becoming closer with the U.S. is gaining traction (and should be headed off appropriately).

The next day, Greenland PM Múte Egede and Danish PM Mette Frederiksen created shockwaves by holding a rare joint press conference, chock-full of paradigm-shifting statements by Egede, who more or less got the Prime Minister of Denmark to concede it has no real say in if or when Greenland decides to become fully independent and pursue cooperative opportunities with other nations. Frederiksen called the Greenlandic will for independence “legitimate and understandable,” and Egede reiterated that the people of his nation “do not want to be Danes. We do not want to be Americans. We, of course, want to be Greenlanders.” Notably, this key quote was truncated — leaving out the part about not wanting to be Danes — and used for “Greenlanders don’t want to be Americans” headlines by The L.A. Times, Politico, and others.

Briefly, to give you a sense of just how much these recent statements have shifted the geopolitical discourse, Danish PM Mette Frederiksen was the same person who called Trump’s ideas “absurd” in 2019 and hoped they were “not meant seriously.” At that time, Lars Lokke Rasmussen, then the Danish PM, characterized Trump’s comments as an out-of-season April Fool’s joke. Kim Kielsen, then Greenland’s PM, also took the whole thing for a farce, warning it was “not something to joke about.” Even Egede has drastically changed his tone in less than a month: on December 23rd, he said simply that “we are not for sale and will never be for sale.” The disappearance of all notable discussion about any potential deal between America and Greenland between 2019 and now is further evidence of how out-of-the-question this all appeared to be. It seems, now, that nobody thinks Trump is kidding anymore.

But back to the joint press conference: after establishing his point clearly — that Greenland is not available for outright sale — Egede went on to state his intent to work with the United States: “We have cooperated with the USA in the past, today, and we will also do so in the future.” He recognized that, per the Monroe Doctrine, America sees Greenland as part of its “backyard,” seeming to find this concept reasonable and citing it as a reason for continued cooperation. Egede specifically mentioned mining and security as dimensions on which Greenland is hoping to collaborate more deeply with the United States and reminded Denmark again that “the status quo is not an option.”

Incidentally, also on January 10th, Russia chimed in, with Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov calling Trump’s rhetoric about Russian presence in the Arctic “dramatic.” On January 12th, Vice President-elect JD Vance reinforced that “there’s a deal to be made in Greenland” and attempted to put any destabilizing notions of using military force to rest. The next day, on January 13th, Russia commented on the situation once again. Russian MP Andrey Gurulev said that “We [Russia] need Greenland, no joke,” suggesting that America split it with them. Egede, in the midst of all of this, reiterated both that the territory is not for sale and that they “seek opportunities for cooperation with Trump.” Denmark’s foreign minister stated that they would work alongside Trump “to ensure legitimate American interests” in the Arctic. Meanwhile, also on the 13th, House Republicans introduced a bill, the Make Greenland Great Again Act, that would authorize Trump to begin negotiations with the Greenlanders.

Danish PM Mette Frederiksen and Trump had a 45-minute phone call on January 15th, with the former conceding Denmark is open to a “stronger U.S. presence in Greenland.” Trump didn’t explicitly comment on the call, but did repost a 2019 survey showing 68% of Greenlanders were in favor of independence. Twenty-four hours later, on January 16th, Frederiksen revealed that Trump hadn’t de-escalated his threat of tariffs at any point on their phone call and said that the situation was “serious.” That same day, she convened Danish business leaders (Novo Nordisk, Lego, Pandora, and others) to discuss the potentially disastrous economic situation they’re now facing — the U.S. is Denmark’s largest market for exports. (Denmark’s foreign minister Lars Lokke Rasmussen also convened the Danish foreign policy committee on the 16th to discuss the Greenland situation.)

But Frederiksen’s submissive stance toward Greenland drew the ire of at least one conservative Danish MP, Rasmus Jarlov, who took to X to post that it is “completely unacceptable that [Frederiksen] relinquishes Denmark’s rights in Greenland and places sovereignty solely with the self-government when she speaks with the President of the United States.” This conflict highlights an irony within Denmark’s self-conception that is worth mentioning. Their blanket stance against colonialism, a position held by all self-identifying progressive nations, has come into direct conflict with their desire to retain authority over Greenland. It is untenable to say both that “America cannot have Greenland” and that “Greenland has the right to make its own decisions.” It seems that, per Frederiksen’s current stance, the former is giving way to the latter.

Last night, in what are possibly the clearest terms thus far, Greenland Prime Minister Múte Egede said that the territory’s people “don’t want to be Americans. We don't want to be a part of [the] U.S., but we want strong cooperation together with [the] U.S." In essence, they want to strike a deal with the United States that will make Greenlandic independence financially feasible, they see the benefits that a motivated U.S. can bring, and they are willing to make it worth our time (and money).

While it remains unclear exactly how the situation will develop, certain realities have emerged: The United States fully intends to increase the depth of its military and economic association with Greenland, Greenland’s leadership is keen to explore what a mutually beneficial partnership of this sort might look like, and Denmark can do little to stop what very well may become one of the most important geopolitical deals of the twenty-first century.

— G. B. Rango