The leader of Greenland, Múte Egede, has shown his readiness to enter into talks with President-elect Trump, although the discussions will not revolve around the United States potentially taking control of the nation.
Instead, the talks would center on the future of the mineral-rich Arctic region, underlining that the people of Greenland have no desire to become part of America.
At a press briefing in Denmark, which maintains nominal sovereignty over Greenland, Egede recognized the strategic significance of Greenland to the U.S. and expressed a willingness to engage in conversations on areas of common interest.
While he has not yet spoken with Trump, Egede stated, ‘We are ready to talk. Cooperation is built on dialogue and finding solutions together.’
Egede was joined by Denmark’s Prime Minister, Mette Frederiksen, at the press conference.
The event comes amid an Axios report that Denmark officials have also communicated privately with Trump’s team ahead of his inauguration.
The secret communiques reportedly indicate the country’s willingness to explore how U.S. security interests could be addressed without transferring formal sovereignty over Greenland.
Greenland, a former colony of Denmark since the 18th century, became a self-governing Danish territory in 1953.
Greenland’s leader, Múte Egede, expressed his willingness to engage in negotiations with President-elect Trump
In August 2019, reports of Trump considering purchasing Greenland sparked swift rejections from political leaders in Greenland and Denmark, some labeling the idea ‘completely ridiculous’ or a ‘joke’
Egede acknowledged Greenland’s strategic importance to the U.S. and expressed a willingness to explore areas of mutual interest
The island gained the right to declare independence through a public vote in 2009 — a move Egede strongly supports.
‘We have a desire for independence, a desire to be the master of our own house … This is something everyone should respect,’ he said. ‘Greenland is for the Greenlandic people. We do not want to be Danish, we do not want to be American. We want to be Greenlandic.’
Greenland’s importance has increased in recent years as melting Arctic ice opens new shipping routes, sparking competition among global powers for influence in the strategically located region between the U.S. and Russia. The territory and its surrounding waters are also abundant in valuable natural resources.
Currently, Denmark retains responsibility for Greenland’s defense.
The president-elect originally floated the idea of acquiring Greenland in his first term in office when discussing the prospect with his senior advisers back in 2019. But he left office without making any movement toward acquiring the territory.
Now, with less than two weeks before he begins a second term, Trump is revisiting the idea – and his son Donald Trump Jr. traveled to Nuuk, Greenland, on Tuesday with other ‘representatives’ of the incoming U.S. president.
At the time, former President Trump shared on Truth Social: ‘Don Jr. and my Reps landing in Greenland. The reception has been great. They, and the Free World, need safety, security, strength, and PEACE! This is a deal that must happen. MAGA. MAKE GREENLAND GREAT AGAIN!’
During the visit, Don Jr. stopped at a local eatery in Nuuk, Greenland, meeting with community members and putting his father on speakerphone to address the residents directly.
At 836,000 square miles, Greenland is a scarcly populated, arctic autonomous territory of Denmark. When comparing it to the purchase of Alaska from Russia in 1967, it can be estimated that Greenland’s total price would come out to approximately $230.25 million – though it’s not likely the same metrics would be use to determine worth
Donald Trump Jr. visited Greenland on Tuesday with three close Trump allies for what was initially being sold as a ‘personal’ trip. It soon became clear that his intentions are to further his father’s intention to buy the arctic territory
On the call, Trump remarked, ‘I just want to say, it’s a very special place. It needs security for itself, but also needs security, very much, for the world,’ Trump said through the phone.
Multiple politicians, including Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen, sent a clear message to Trump: ‘Greenland is not for sale.’
Her remarks prompted Trump to cancel a planned state visit to Denmark on August 20, 2019.
But if it were, how much would it cost the U.S.?
Some have said the best comparison is looking at the U.S. purchase of Alaska from Russia in 1867.
Both Alaska and Greenland have cold, arctic climates, similarly scarce population density, strategic geographic placement and a richness of oil reserves.
The U.S. purchased Alaska, which is 586,412 square miles, for $7.2 million. In today’s dollars, that equates to around $153.5 million.
Greenland is about 150 percent the size of Alaska at 836,000 square miles. So by boosting that price by 50 percent, the total would come to approximately $230.25 million.
In examining past considerations for purchasing Greenland, history offers some intriguing comparisons. In 1946, the U.S. proposed buying the Arctic island for $100 million in gold, a sum that would equate to over $1.6 billion today.
Despite this valuation, both figures fall short of Greenland’s gross domestic product, which stood at $3.24 billion USD in 2021.
For further context, the U.S. bought the U.S. Virgin Islands from Denmark in 1917 for $25 million in gold, equivalent to approximately $616.2 million today.
The Louisiana Purchase from France in 1803 cost $15 million, roughly $418.8 million in today’s terms. These historical transactions highlight the uncertainty around how much a Greenland purchase might cost, should such a deal ever be pursued.
The logistics of such a transaction remain complex. Under the U.S. Constitution, Congress must approve any allocation of funds for land acquisition.
Even with a supportive Congress, whether they would back such a proposal is unclear.
When reports surfaced in August 2019 of then-President Trump considering the purchase of Greenland, political leaders in both Greenland and Denmark swiftly rejected the notion. Some dismissed it as ‘completely ridiculous’ or a ‘joke.’
