It sounded like a joke at first. Back in 2019, when the news broke that Donald Trump was looking into "buying" Greenland, most of the world laughed. There were memes of a giant gold Trump Tower photoshopped onto a rocky, icy cliff. Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen called the idea "absurd." But here’s the thing: Trump wasn’t kidding. And in 2026, as he navigates his second term, the "Greenland question" is somehow back on the table, more serious and more tense than ever.
Honestly, if you look at a map, you’ll see why. Greenland isn’t just a big block of ice. It’s a massive, strategic fortress sitting right between North America, Europe, and Russia.
The $100 Million Offer You Probably Forgot About
Most people think this started with a tweet, but the U.S. has been trying to buy Greenland for a long time. After World War II, in 1946, President Harry Truman offered Denmark $100 million in gold for the island. He even threw in some land in Alaska as a sweetener. Denmark said no then, too.
Fast forward to today. The world is different. The ice is melting, and that’s changing the math. When Trump brought it up again, he wasn't just thinking about real estate. He was thinking about what’s under the ice.
Why Greenland? It’s All About the Dirt (and the Submarines)
You've probably heard of "rare earth minerals." They’re in your phone, your EV battery, and the guidance systems of F-35 fighter jets. Right now, China controls the vast majority of these. Greenland happens to be sitting on one of the biggest untapped deposits on the planet.
- Kvanefjeld: A site in southern Greenland that’s basically a goldmine for neodymium and praseodymium.
- Tanbreez: Another massive deposit that some geologists think could be the largest in the world.
But it’s not just the minerals. As the Arctic ice thins, new shipping routes are opening up. If you control Greenland, you control the gateway to the "Polar Silk Road." Russia is already building up its Arctic military bases. China has declared itself a "near-Arctic state." Basically, the U.S. doesn't want to be left out in the cold.
👉 See also: Casey Ramirez: The Small Town Benefactor Who Smuggled 400 Pounds of Cocaine
Trump to Buy Greenland: What Most People Get Wrong
The biggest misconception is that this is a simple real estate transaction. You can't just write a check for a country. Greenland is an autonomous territory within the Kingdom of Denmark. It has its own parliament and its own people—about 57,000 of them, mostly Inuit.
Under the 2009 Self-Government Act, Greenlanders have the right to declare independence. If they do that, Denmark has no say in who they partner with. Trump’s strategy seems to be shifting from "buying" it from Denmark to wooing Greenland directly—or, as he’s hinted recently, using more "difficult" methods if diplomacy fails.
The 2026 Reality Check
Recently, things have taken a sharper turn. In January 2026, Vice President JD Vance met with Danish and Greenlandic officials. The vibe? "Fundamental disagreement."
Trump has been blunt. He recently told reporters on Air Force One that Greenland's defense is basically "two dog sleds" and that the U.S. "needs" the island for national security. He’s even mentioned that we’re going to do something about it "either the nice way or the more difficult way." That kind of talk has people in Copenhagen and Nuuk (Greenland's capital) very nervous.
"Greenland is not for sale and will never be for sale." — Múte Egede, Greenland's Prime Minister.
✨ Don't miss: Lake Nyos Cameroon 1986: What Really Happened During the Silent Killer’s Release
The Secret Influence of Ronald Lauder
There’s a name you don’t hear much in the headlines: Ronald Lauder. He’s the heir to the Estée Lauder makeup fortune and a long-time friend of Trump. Reports suggest it was actually Lauder who first put the idea of Greenland in Trump’s head back in 2018.
Lauder has been pouring money into Greenlandic businesses, including luxury markets and even a potential hydroelectric project. It’s a classic example of how private business interests and national foreign policy often get tangled up.
What Really Happens if the U.S. Pushes Too Hard?
If Trump actually tried to move on Greenland without consent—say, through economic coercion or a military presence—it would likely break NATO. Denmark is a founding member. An "invasion" or forced annexation of an ally's territory is unheard of in the modern West.
But there is a "middle path."
Many Greenlanders actually want independence from Denmark. They need a big economic partner to make that happen. If the U.S. offers enough investment in infrastructure, airports, and mining, Greenland might choose to move away from Denmark and into a "Compact of Free Association" with the U.S., similar to how Palau or the Marshall Islands operate.
🔗 Read more: Why Fox Has a Problem: The Identity Crisis at the Top of Cable News
Actionable Insights: What This Means for You
Whether or not the U.S. ever "buys" Greenland, the region is becoming the next big geopolitical flashpoint. Here is what to keep an eye on:
- Watch the Mining Stocks: Companies like Critical Metals Corp and Neo Performance Materials are already scouting the area. If the U.S. secures a deal, these stocks will move.
- Arctic Security: Keep an eye on the Pituffik Space Base. Any expansion of U.S. military hardware there is a sign that the "purchase" talk is moving into a "presence" reality.
- Danish-U.S. Relations: If the rhetoric stays hot, expect friction in other areas of NATO cooperation.
To stay ahead of this, you should track the "High-Level Working Group" meetings between the U.S., Denmark, and Greenland. Those quiet meetings in windowless rooms will tell you way more than a loud press conference ever will.
The idea of Trump to buy Greenland isn't going away. It's a mix of old-school 19th-century expansionism and 21st-century resource hunger. Whether it's "the nice way" or "the difficult way," the Arctic is heating up in more ways than one.
To get a clearer picture of the stakes, you can look up the official 2023 Danish survey on Greenland’s critical raw materials or monitor the updates from the Wilson Center’s Polar Institute, which tracks Arctic sovereignty issues in real-time.