How Necessary Is Greenland for the U.S. National Security?
Disclaimer: This is an opinion piece.
The Facts
Over recent months, President Trump on numerous occasions has suggested that for National Security purposes, Greenland should come under U.S. control. President Trump has also added that he would not rule out military force to take Greenland forcefully. Greenland is currently considered “Semi-Autonomous Territory,” because it is technically owned by the Danish government (Denmark). It was a Danish colony up until 1953, when it was given semi-autonomous status. As a semi-autonomous nation, Greenland has its own government and parliament and is able to hold elections. However, important matters such as defense, economic affairs, and foreign affairs fall under Danish decision making, as their primary protectorate.
PHOTOGRAPH: UNSPLASH
My Opinion
Having a strong relationship with Greenland, and thus Denmark, is important due to strategic, economic, and national security reasons. Each of these reasons will be discussed in detail later in this piece. However, the U.S. already has a strong relationship with Greenland, as they have an American military base located in the island nation, pursuant to a defense agreement between the U.S. and Greenland-Denmark governments. Thus, going as far as taking over Greenland isn't necessary due to our existing positive relationship with the Danish government. Additionally, taking over Greenland isn't a particularly popular choice among the natives to the island. According to a recent survey, 85% of Greenlanders don't want to become part of the U.S.
Aside from these broader considerations, I will break down this debate by topic. Firstly, I believe that Greenland is important to U.S. national security due to its strategic position in the arctic region. Currently, the U.S. has an agreement with the Danish to operate a military base in the northwest of Greenland. This military base is important, as its primary mission is to deliver missile warnings and conduct defense operations. In the event that Russia launches a military strike on the U.S., the base would be alerted almost immediately, providing the U.S. with necessary time to respond. Additionally, the island is important strategically, as it serves as a chokepoint for the entry of Russian ships and submarines to the Atlantic ocean. It is vital to U.S. national security that the military can keep a track on Russian ships in the area. However, taking over the island is not necessary to monitor Russian ships and maintain missile defense technology because the current relationship status between the U.S. and Denmark is so strong.
The second reason Greenland is important is for economic purposes. Firstly, as global warming continues to deplete ice in the northern hemisphere, the arctic is increasingly opening up for marine access, thus increasing the possibility of new sea routes in the area. These new routes could consequently increase the number of major shipping lanes for foreign exports and imports. Accordingly, it is of utmost importance to U.S. economic dominance to prevent Russia's advantage over the arctic. The U.S. will want to make sure it can counter Russia in these waters. Thus, having a strong relationship with Greenland is key. Additionally, Greenland is home to a wide variety of natural resources, including graphite, copper, and nickel. Graphite and copper are both key components for the production of electric vehicle batteries, which are a key production priority within the U.S.. Alongside these elements, Greenland has access to numerous untapped natural gas sources, both along its coast and on the mainland.
Conclusion
Given the current status quo, it is not necessary for the U.S. to take over Greenland. The U.S. can still ensure its national security and economic interests under the nations’ current relationship, especially given the positive relationship between the Danish and American governments. President Trump may want to take over Greenland; however, I don't think this is likely to happen, nor necessary for U.S. policy priorities.
