Trump’s Greenland deal: What the US gains, from military expansion to limiting geopolitical rivals

The new Greenland agreement does not transfer sovereignty over the island to Washington or turn it into a US territory, despite US President Donald Trump portraying it as a pact that guarantees permanent American “control” over its security.

The aim of this framework is to strengthen and extend the United States’ strategic role in Greenland. In addition to expanding rights related to its military presence, the agreement seeks to limit the scope for third countries to establish military deployments or make strategically sensitive investments.

US military involvement on the island dates back to World War II. The main legal basis for this presence remains the agreement of April 27, 1951, signed by the United States and Denmark.

The 1951 pact authorized the US to establish defense areas, build and operate military installations, deploy equipment and supplies, and move forces across Greenland’s land territory, airspace and territorial waters.

The island’s position along the northern corridors between Russia and North America led to a significant expansion of the US presence during the Cold War. Greenland was also particularly important for early-warning systems against ballistic missiles.

With the end of the Cold War, US involvement declined. The 2004 Igaliku Agreement subsequently amended the framework established in 1951 and designated Thule Air Base, now known as Pituffik Space Base, as the active US defense area in Greenland.

However, the 2004 document did not rule out the establishment of additional US defense areas. It kept in place the mechanism for creating them, provided that the parties reached an agreement.

Restricting the role of third powers is one of the main new elements of the new framework. Under the agreement, countries that are not members of NATO may not build bases or establish any other similar military presence in Greenland.

This provision is aimed primarily at Russia and China and marks an important departure from the 1951 agreement. While the earlier document mainly regulated how the US could use the island for the defense of the North Atlantic, the new framework also seeks to define the limits of rival powers’ activities in Greenland.

The agreement also addresses investment, providing for restrictions on sensitive projects originating from countries regarded as strategic competitors of the United States. According to Trump’s statements, such investments by non-NATO countries would require US approval.

The importance of this aspect is linked to Greenland’s mineral reserves and critical raw materials, as well as the growing significance of ports, airports, telecommunications and energy infrastructure in the Arctic.

The pact’s full legal text has not yet been published. Copenhagen and Nuuk have also not endorsed all the language used by Trump regarding the extent of US control. Consequently, the political interpretation presented by the White House must be distinguished from the powers that will ultimately be enshrined in the binding document.

The island also plays an important role in US plans for the “Golden Dome,” the new American missile defense system. Pituffik Space Base already has space-surveillance and early-warning capabilities, while an expanded US presence could include radars, sensors, communications systems and other infrastructure related to missile defense.

Even with the strengthening of the US role, the agreement does not affect sovereignty over Greenland. The new framework reaffirms the territorial integrity and sovereignty of the Kingdom of Denmark, as well as the island’s residents’ right to self-determination.

Greenland’s potential future status remains a fundamental long-term issue. The agreement is designed to ensure that the US strategic presence continues even if the island one day gains full independence from Denmark.

For this reason, the main difference between the 1951 agreement and the new framework is not limited solely to the military presence that the US has maintained for decades. The new element lies in expanding the security architecture while simultaneously preventing China, Russia or other competing powers from establishing a strategic presence on the island.

Greenland’s geographical position, mineral wealth and role in missile defense are making it increasingly important to US strategy in the Arctic and to the national security of the United States.