Greenland: “It’s the white man—send him home!”
Caught between a Danish colonial past and threats from Donald Trump’s US, Greenland (Kalaallit Nunaat) will hold elections to its parliament, the Inartsiartut, today, on March 11. Greenland’s political status within the Kingdom of Denmark is difficult to explain, especially to those who are not from Denmark or its Northern Atlantic territories. Yet, understanding this dynamic is crucial to grasping what is at stake in Greenland’s elections.
“Greenland is an autonomous territory in the Kingdom of Denmark,” states Wikipedia—a precise and accurate description of the order of things. But what does this really mean? The Act on Greenland Self-Government of 2009 grants Greenland self-governance in most areas, including public finances, environmental affairs, and public welfare. This structure mirrors that of many political systems around the world. Similarly, Greenlandic electionsrevolve around the same issues as elections everywhere: public health, education, and the economy. However, in the current world order, geopolitics is beginning to drown out Greenland’s domestic concerns, to the point that Greenlanders themselves are calling for more focus on domestic politics in the election campaign.
Article 21 of the Act of Self-Government gives the Greenlandic population the right to decide whether they want to pursue independence. Greenlandic politicians can choose to initiate negotiations with Denmark on independence, with the outcome determined by a referendum. Yet, Greenland is not fully independent: Copenhagen retains control over areas such as the Danish constitution, citizenship, the Supreme Court, and foreign, security, and defence politics. And this is why Greenland, with its roughly 57.000 inhabitants, is attracting much more attention than usual.
Steps towards self-rule
Greenland was not always free to determine its own future. Until the mid-20th century, it was a Danish colony with Denmark holding a state monopoly on trade. This changed after the Second World War when Greenland became a county in Denmark—at least on paper, equal to Denmark’s other counties. This was a decision taken in Copenhagen, with no democratic input from Greenland.
The Second World War opened Greenland to the rest of the world, showing that no country, no matter how distant, was safe from global events. While Germany occupied Denmark, the US took control of Greenland to secure the lines of communication and supply between North America and Europe. This also marked the beginning of the American military presence in Greenland—some people still call it an occupation—that continues to this day. This is what Aqqaluk Lynge thinks. He is the founder of the Greenlandic left-wing party Inuit Ataqatigiit (IA), which is currently lead by Greenland’s prime minister Múte B Egede. Nonetheless, Greenland became part of NATO when Denmark joined as a founding member in 1949.
Over time, Greenland gained more autonomy, starting with the Home Rule Act of 1979, which established its first parliamentary assembly. This was followed by the Self-Government Act of 2009, which recognised the Greenlandic people’s right to self-determination under international law, opening the path toward full independence from Denmark.
An independent Greenland?
“A ship arrived at Julianehåb. As it docked, destinies were at stake. It’s the white man—send him home!” These are the opening lines of a famous song from 1974 by the legendary Danish rock band Gasolin’. It is easy to hope that the Greenlandic population use their right as a people to self-determination to “send the white man back home” and finally become an independent country. The reality, however, is far more complex.
In Greenland, if you are unfortunate enough to be diagnosed with a rare type of cancer, you will be flown to Denmark for treatment. If you want to study a wide range of subjects at university, you must do so abroad—and the choice often falls on Denmark with its free public education and state subsidies for students. Will such options—and many others like them—still be available after independence?
According to the Act on Self-Government from 2009, Greenland has the right to take over jurisdiction on 30 policy areas, which today are controlled by Denmark, including the police, aviation and food safety. Since the Act came into force, Greenland has assumed control over natural resources, the country’s time zone, and working conditions on offshore platforms. However, since 2010, Greenland has not taken control over any new areas of governance. Yet control of these key areas is necessary for a modern state, even if they are often overlooked in the debate over independence and geopolitics.
Barriers to Self-Governance?
According to economics professor Torben M Andersen, who is the chairman of the Greenlandic Economic Council, the challenges to independence are not just matters of financial resources, but also to a lack of competence. While Denmark can deliver highly educated workers to run these parts of the state apparatus, he argues, Greenland does not have enough people with the required expertise—at least for now.
In Denmark, the issue of annual grants is central to the debate. In 2024, Denmark sent 4,3 billion DKK (roughly 577 million euro) to Greenland. Additionally, Denmark contributes another 2 billion DKK to over areas of which Greenland has yet to take control. In fact, according to Greenland’s Statistical Bureau, money from Denmark makes up no less than 40 percent of Greenland’s economy—6 billion DKK out of an annual budget of 14 billion DKK.
Would Denmark continue to send such significant financial support to Greenland, if Greenland were to declare its independence? Most parties in the Danish parliament do their best to avoid answering the question.
Majority support
Despite these challenges, a large part of Greenland’s population supports independence. In a January 2025 opinion poll, 56 percent of Greenlanders replied that they would vote “yes” if a referendum on independence were held today. 28 percent said they would vote “no,” while 16 percent were undecided. However, the same opinion poll revealed that 45 percent of respondents opposed independence if it led to a decliSne in living conditions.
According to Qivioq Løvstrøm, chairwoman of the Greenlandic Council for Human Rights, Greenlanders support independence because they want to be recognised as an equal part of the world. She thinks that Greenland should pursue a “free association” agreement with Denmark, maintaining some ties between the two countries—such as economic support. In her opinion, Denmark must accept this arrangement as a way to atone for their colonial sins against the Greenlandic population.
Independence and elections
For most Danes, Greenland is an afterthought, a place they rarely consider in their daily lives. Greenlanders, however, are forced to think about Denmark regularly. This reflects the underlying imbalance in Danish-Greenlandic relations—an imbalance that Greenlanders hope to eliminate of by achieving independence. Greenland’s desire for independence is nothing new. While almost all political parties support the idea, they fifer on the specifics of how and when independence should be achieved.
In the Inartsisartut, Greenland’s parliament, 31 seats are divided among five parties. The three largest parties—the left-wing party IA, social democratic Siumut, and the centrist Naleraq—are all pro-independence, with Naleraq being the most outspoken, followed by Siumut and IA. During the election campaign, Siumut has promised that a referendum would be held within the next four years. But after Aki-Matilda Høegh-Dam, a very outspoken pro-independence politician and the party’s only member of the Danish Parliament, left Siumut to join Naleraq, Siumut withdrew its promise. Indeed, it may have been made in an attempt to dissuade Høegh-Dam—one of the most popular politicians in Greenland—from leaving.
According to the most recent opinion poll, the two parties in the current government—IA and Siumut—are expected to lose voters, while Naleraq is likely to gain seats in parliament. However, with a bit of luck, IA and Siumut may still hold on to a majority. Credible opinion polls are hard to come by in Greenland, though, particularly since the national telecommunication company stopped sharing phone numbers in 2022. Opinion polls are now conducted from Denmark, and even those are infrequent. This uncertainty makes predicting the outcome of the March 11 vote even harder.
Trump enters stage right
The opinion poll from the end of January did provide one very clear answer: 85 percent of Greenland’s population does not wish to become a part of the US. Unfortunately, Donald Trump is determined to acquire Greenland—supposedly to safeguard US’s national security—and he is not taking “no” for an answer. Trump has revived his “offer” to buy Denmark from Greenland, but he has also repeatedly stated that the US has other ways of getting what it wants—and has refused to rule out military action.
Perhaps Donald Trump is unaware of Article 21 in the Act on Greenland Self-Government, which asserts that the future of Greenland is the Greenlandic people’s decision. Even if Denmark wanted to sell Greenland—which it does not—it would be legally impossible. Or perhaps Trump simply doesn’t care. Security policy commentators in Denmark and elsewhere have expressed confusion over what security Trump would achieve by taking over Greenland. Indeed, “Greenland is already de facto occupied by the US”, as lecturer in war studies Peter Viggo Jakobsen has noted.
US military presence
The US military presence in Greenland dates back to World War II and continued throughout the Cold War. The shortest path for a nuclear missile from northern Russia to the continental US is over the North Pole and Greenland. This is why the US army established a radar base—Pituffik Space Base (formerly Thule Air Base)—in northwestern Greenland. The base is an integral part of the US early warning system. There is also nothing preventing an expanded American military presence in the region. Under international agreements, which were in force until recently, it is impossible to imagine Denmark refusing the United States the permission to establish additional bases in Greenland.
President Trump has expressed his worries that Russian boats and China boats (sic) roam freely in the waters off Greenland. While it is true that Denmark’s own military presence in the Northern Atlantic is insufficient, the Danish government is now taking steps to address this by rearming its fleet and its military presence in Greenland. The questions remains: will these efforts happen quickly enough for mister Trump? And will it ever be possible to meet Trump’s demands, no matter how much the Danish military presence in Greenland and the Northern Atlantic is amped up? No one knows.
Mining interests
Another explanation for President Trump’s interest in Greenland is the presence of precious minerals—so-called “rare earths”—which are essential for manufacturing make windmills, electric cars and a wide range of electronic equipment. Trump wants the US to get their hands on these minerals—or at least, ensure that the Chinese don’t get there first. Once again, however, there is nothing currently preventing American companies from seeking permission to extract these minerals. The mineral deposits have been known about for centuries, according to the Greenlandic geologist Minik Rovsing.
The problem is that extracting the minerals is not easy. Greenand’s harsh weather conditions, vast ice coverage, and remote terrain – with no roads—makes operations extremely challenging. All heavy equipment has to be transported by ship, which is costly and complicated. As a result, even if one secures the rights to mine these resources, profits may be minimal. None of this would change if the US were to take control of Greenland. (Greenland’s climate also makes it an unlikely location for a luxury riviera, as Trump has fantasised about for Gaza).
The Danish government, by all accounts, hopes to persuade Trump to abandon his ambitions for Greenland by granting expanded authority for US military presence in Greenland. Perhaps some American companies could be granted special concessions to extract minerals from Greenland’s vast underground resources, allowing Trump to boast to his voters: “Haha, see what I got them to agree to, because I am strong and the best negotiator.” As a small country, Denmark would have to live with such a humiliation, which feels akin to the worst kind of schoolyard bullying, because that’s what it is. But there may be another, more discomforting, explanation: perhaps Trump simply wants to take over Greenland as a way of expanding US’s territory.
Donald The Conqueror
Trump has never hidden these intentions. Panama, Canada—perhaps even Mexico—also seem to be within his sights. He has opposed Ukraine’s struggle for freedom against the Russian war of aggression, perhaps giving us all the more reason to be afraid of his intentions toward Greenland, Panama and Canada.
President Trump appears to accept Russia’s annexation of large parts of another country’s territory by military force. In the past, such an attitude might have raised fears that China could be emboldened to take similar actions in Taiwan. Now, we must consider the possibility that Russia’s aggression could also inspire other authoritarian leaders of great powers –including the United States.
The US president is in the process of populating the state apparatus—and to some extent the media—with yes-men and sycophants, consolidating power around himself as an individual. He associates with the richest men in the country and the world in his eagerness to shape society in his own image. Increasingly, this all bears resemblance to a medieval court (Trump has even begun calling himself “king”). And what did a great medieval king do, according to popular history? He went a-conquering.
Next act: Greenland
So, the stage is set for Greenland’s parliamentary elections, and the US has become a lead actor. This January, Donald Trump Jr. and his entourage arrived in Greenland for a charm offensive. They offered some locals a free lunch, so the visitors could have their picture taken with some Greenlanders and claim that the natives were big fans of the US. Accordingly, Junior claimed that the people of Greenland “love” his dad, while Donald Trump Sr. asserted, “They want to be with us”.
It is, of course, not true. 85 percent of Greenland’s population does not want to join the US. But Trump’s statements come in a time where Greenlandic independence is a hot topic, and the island’s political parties are campaigning to a population that wants independence.
Strange bedfellows
The American overtures can further drive a wedge between the different parts of the Kingdom of Denmark. Indeed, Pele Broberg, the leader of Naleraq—Greenland’s most pro-independence party—has openly stated that Trump’s remarks are helping the independence movement: “Keep doing what you’re doing. This really helps the independence movement.”
Pro-independence Greenlandic parliamentarian Kuno Fencker—a former member of Siumut, who has now joined Naleraq alongside his fiancé and fellow political apostate, Høegh-Dam—recently visited Washington for what he described as “private networking”. Among those he met with was Republican Congressman Andy Ogles, who introduced the bill that would allow Trump to buy Greenland. In this way, Trump’s allies are using the most vocal pro-independence politicians to further their own independence agenda, and vice versa.
Electoral interference
Mogens Lykketoft—former Foreign Minister, Finance Minister, chairman of the Danish Social Democrats and President of the UN General Assembly—has warned that we can expect Donald Trump’s US to push for the takeover of Greenland through “a prolonged carpet-bombing from the MAGA movement with the familiar mix of threats, promises, and lies.”
Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen shares Lykketoft’s concerns about foreign interference in Greenland’s elections. Despite a recent law passed by the Greenlandic parliament banning foreign funds from influencing Greenlandic politics, the Danish intelligence services felt it necessary to raise the threat level for foreign interference in the coming election to the Inatsisartut.
Ending colonial control
The left-wing party IA, which is still the party of the prime minister, remains firm in its rejection of President Trump’s overtures. In the words of Pipaluk Lynge, member of Inatsisartut for IA: “Our struggle for independence began in 1979. We have not kept this struggle going just to end up with another colonial power in charge.”
IA does indeed seek independence, but they are more oriented towards Europe than towards the US. ”Our values are closer to Europe’s than to the US’s,” argues Lynge. “This includes LGBTQ+ rights, women’s and children’s rights, our climate ambitions, and the welfare state.” Whether Lynges’ vision, along with the aspirations of Greenland’s ruling progressive left-wing party and its people, can withstand the renewed interests and pressures of imperialist superpowers remains to be seen.
Jonas Neivelt is editor at the Danish left-wing online magazine Solidaritet.dk.