Diplomatic Failures

In the midst of the coalition negotiations, at a time when there was no official representative to speak on behalf of the Greenlandic government, US vice president J. D. Vance announced he would be joining his wife on what had been billed as a cultural trip to Greenland. Usha Vance was due to attend Avannaata Qimussersua, Greenland’s annual dog sled race, in the process highlighting funding it had received from the US consulate in Nuuk.

The planned visit, and the announcement that Trump’s then national security advisor Mike Waltz would be making a separate trip to the island, provoked an understandably negative reaction in both Nuuk and Copenhagen. The addition of the vice president to the trip schedule transformed it into a brief stopover at the United States’ Pituffik space base in northern Greenland. This avoided the potential spectacle of a silent protest against Mrs Vance’s arrival, where local residents had planned to turn their backs on the Second Lady.

For an administration so preoccupied with optics, that would have been a difficult photo to spin. Denmark’s foreign minister, Lars Løkke Rasmussen, recognized this, calling the decision to visit only the US-operated Pituffik “very positive,” and one made to “look like they’re escalating when they’re actually de-escalating.”

While the visit itself may have been a de-escalation in comparison with potential alternatives, it nonetheless marked a continuation of the Trump administration’s combination of aggressive statements toward Denmark with vague platitudes about Greenlanders and requirements of unconditional loyalty from its own underlings.

In the aftermath of Vance’s visit to the far north, during which he criticized Denmark for “not [having] done a good job by the people of Greenland,” the commander of the base was removed for clarifying in an email that “the concerns of the US administration discussed by vice-president Vance on Friday are not reflective of Pituffik space base.”

According to a 2024 survey by the Swedish research organization Novus, just 4.5 percent of the Danish population would have voted for Donald Trump if they were able to. This was the lowest percentage out of all the forty-five countries polled.

A defense agreement originally signed in 2023 between the Danish government and the Biden administration, which grants the US army sweeping powers over the areas surrounding its Danish bases, has now come under significant scrutiny in the buildup toward its likely ratification. In a reflection of just how much things have changed in the last two years, Foreign Minister Rasmussen was forced to clarify that Denmark would be able to pull out of the deal in the event of a US invasion of Greenland.

Intelligence-Gathering, Not Invasion

Such an invasion remains unlikely, but a period of relative calm in recent weeks has not given Greenlanders any sense of security. Jeppe Strandsbjerg, an associate professor at the University of Greenland and the Royal Danish Defence College, says that the US interest has “been taking up so much space, and there’s been so much focus on it, that it would be strange if it just disappeared from the agenda.” Instead, he says, “there’s a wait and see, let’s see what happens attitude.”

Just because the media storm has quietened, Greenland can’t suddenly take things easy. In early May, the Wall Street Journal reported that officials at various US intelligence agencies had been asked to ramp up their espionage efforts in Greenland and find people on the ground who might be sympathetic to deepening ties with the United States. While Trump’s focus is elsewhere, and with his statements having done little to help relations, the United States is attempting to gradually shift Greenlandic opinion in its favor.

Strandsbjerg says this is unlikely to be a new development and likely represents “a different variation or degree of what they were also doing before in terms of gathering information, getting to know Greenland better, you know, figuring out what is the perception or the status of the US in Greenland, in case Greenland becomes independent. That has probably been an agenda all along.”

Days after the Wall Street Journal report, CNN revealed that the Pentagon was considering moving American responsibility for Greenlandic security issues from the US European Command to US Northern Command, the section of the Department of Defense responsible for North America. This would be a change with limited practical relevance for Greenlanders, but a further attempt to isolate the island from Europe and tie it into the United States’ direct sphere of influence.

For the time being, though, this approach isn’t working. Strandsbjerg says this is evident in Facebook discussions on the US consulate in Nuuk, which “used to be quite positive.” Even before the latest disturbances, he says,

the view on the US presence had already changed in terms of being skeptical, maybe being a bit cautious about what was the agenda. . . . The general perception among some has changed, but you also still find voices that say, “Let’s just get as much out of it as we can, or make the best deal for us, because the Americans are here anyway.”

Even among those with more positive attitudes toward the United States, perspectives seem to be based on a pragmatic standpoint more than any ideological desire to be part of a large North American family.

That vague idea seems further away than ever, as in recent weeks, the new Greenlandic government has stressed its relationship with the EU as a reliable partner, offering a mining permit to a Danish-French group, while demanding better terms from the deal that allows the United States to use Greenland for military purposes regardless of the views of residents. With any concrete proposals from the United States over a future relationship yet to emerge, Greenland must focus on its own priorities.

Domestic Concerns

The much-heralded redevelopment of the airport in Nuuk was meant to smooth the path of international business and tourism. In the first four months of 2025, however, thirty-two transatlantic flights to Greenland were canceled or diverted, mostly due to bad weather on the west coast. The figure for the same period last year, when flights were headed inland to the calmer skies of Kangerlussuaq, was one.

On the coast, Greenland’s nationalized ferry service, Arctic Umiaq Line, saw far lower passenger figures in 2024 than a year before, as a result of a failed gamble on higher-paying tourist trips. Although there are more cars on Greenland’s roads than ever, the territory’s very first road between two settlements remains far from completion. Development on the coasts of the far north is complicated and, with the ground melting below the feet of tourists and the heavy machinery of mineral extractors, ever-vulnerable to the changing climate.

Aaja Chemnitz, one of two Greenlandic representatives in the Danish Parliament, recently put out a call on Facebook for input on why people choose to leave Greenland. The answers highlighted a few common themes: housing, schooling, health care, and the cost of living. These are long-term problems, none of which Trump has meaningfully addressed in his headline statements on “security” and “freedom.”

Having formed a unity government primarily in order to head off the US advances, members of the governing coalition are divided on exactly how to address these issues. Both of the previous governing parties are now in government with elements of the former opposition, which makes finding consensus on policies such as Greenland’s controversial fisheries legislation difficult.

The largest party, Demokraatit, may have won its vote share in part because of its opposition to the plan that, among other things, reduced catch quotas for large companies. Yet its leaders must now work with Inuit Ataqatigiit and Siumut, architects of the legislation.

In practice, discussions over a US takeover are immaterial without an idea of how it would change the lives of Greenlanders. Having been forced to focus on events outside of its control, and choosing to integrate more closely with Denmark, the coalition government can now use the world’s attention to stake out Greenland’s position in the international system.