Op-ed: Trump’s Plan to Send New Delegation to Greenland

This is an opinion piece written by external contributors. All views expressed are the writer's own.

Sunday, the White House announced that on Thursday, 27 March 2025, Second Lady Usha Vance and her son will travel to Greenland along with a US delegation “to visit historical sites, learn about Greenlandic heritage, and attend the Avannaata Qimussersu, Greenland’s national dogsled race”.

Commenting on the race itself, it said that it “brings together approximately 37 mushers and 444 dogs in a remarkable display of speed, skill and teamwork”, and that “Ms Vance and the delegation are excited to witness this monumental race and celebrate Greenlandic culture and unity”.

Vance and the delegation are expected to return to the US on Saturday, 29 March 2025. 

The US Consulate in Nuuk shared a video post by Usha Vance, wherein she shared, “Hello! I’m so excited I’ll be visiting Kalaallit Nunnaat, Greenland, next weekend. I’m particularly thrilled to be visiting during your national dog sled race, which our country is proud to support as a sponsor. I’ve been reading all about it with my children, and I’m amazed by the incredible skill and teamwork that it takes to participate in this race. I’m also coming to celebrate the long history of mutual respect and cooperation between our nations, and to express hope that our relationship will only grow stronger in the coming years. I look forward to meeting many of you soon, and to learning from you about your beautiful land, culture and traditions. See you soon.”

What else do we know? 

• We know that the US delegation will also include US National Security Adviser Michael Waltz, Energy Secretary Chris Wright, and other US officials.
• We know that Waltz and Wright are also expected to visit the U.S. military base (Pituffik Space Base) in Greenland.
• We know that the US Consulate in Nuuk is sponsoring the dog sled race, as confirmed by the head of the board of the organisation.
• We know that the visit is being conducted in a private capacity, with the Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen clarifying that neither the government of Greenland nor the government of Denmark were involved in soliciting or organising the visits.
• We know that the visit has greatly concerned both Greenland and Denmark, with around 100 police officers and three dogs flown into Nuuk from Denmark today (23 March).
• We also know that an American team arrived in Greenland today (23 March) in order to make arrangements ahead of the visit. 

Why is the matter of such great concern? 

On 11 March 2025, Greenland had its general election, with the opposition party Demokraatit winning the most votes, followed by another opposition party Naleraq, while the two parties in the coalition government - Inuit Ataqatigiit (IA) and Siumut - came third and fourth respectively.

The ball is now in Demokraatit’s court to identify partners with which it would wish to form a coalition government. The key difference between the two leading parties is that for Naleraq, political independence is a top goal, while for Demokraatit, it is more of an end goal.

While Naleraq wishes the government adopt a more urgent pursuit of independence, Demokraatit tends to prefer a more gradual process, and in this sense is more akin to IA in its approach.

What approach to independence from Denmark, and any future relationship with the US, will win the day will ultimately depend on who Demokraatit decides to form a coalition government with. 

Demokraatit has a set number of days from the day of the election (11 March 2025) to form a new government. If it cannot reach agreement with the other parties by then and form a coalition, then it could trigger a crisis.

Following an early round of negotiations, the leader of Demokraatit Jens Frederik Nielsen said, “This is not the time for political tactics and internal disagreements.

The situation for our country is far too serious for that. When someone threatens us, looks down on us or speaks badly of us, we stand together." 

On 13 March, in a meeting with NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte, Trump once again reiterated his desire to annex and control Greenland, citing its importance for international security, prompting the outgoing Greenlandic Prime Minister Mute Bourup Egede to respond, “Enough is enough”. 

On 14 March, at Egede's behest, the chairmen of the five parties elected to the Greenlandic Parliament (Inatsisarsut) - Jens Frederik Nielsen of Demokraatit, Pele Broberg of Naleraq, Mute Bourup Egede of Inuit Ataqatigiit, Vivian Motzfeldt of Siumut and Aqqalu Jeremiassen of Atassut – met and released a joint statement saying that they “cannot accept the repeated statements about annexation and control of Greenland.

As party chairmen, we find this behavior unacceptable towards friends and allies in a defense alliance.”

On 15 March, nearly a thousand Greenlanders protested against Trump’s threat of annexation in Nuuk and other settlements across Greenland, with signs such as “Make America Go Away”, a play on MAGA.

Demokraatit’s Jens Frederik Nielsen stated, “There is not the slightest chance that I will talk to Trump about Greenland becoming part of the U.S. Greenland will be Greenland.”

As of 23 March, the negotiations between the parties continue, and Greenland still does not have a new government in place. Furthermore, on 1 April, local elections are to be held across Greenland to elect members of the five municipal councils.

Denmark has traditionally respected the electoral process in Greenland and, likewise, stayed well clear while negotiations to form a new government were in place. 

It is most unusual, thus, that at a time when Greenland still does not have a new government in place, and while negotiations to form a coalition are in progress, and indeed while local elections are to be held a couple of days after the visit, there should be a high-level US delegation visiting Greenland without any invitation from or involvement of Greenlandic and Danish officials. 

Some local politicians in Greenland are seeing it as foreign election interference, while the outgoing Greenlandic Prime Minister has described the visit as “highly aggressive”.

In an interview with Sermitsiaq, Egede called on the international community to react, saying, “The very aggressive American pressure against the Greenlandic community is now so serious that the level cannot be raised any higher.

Standing together in Greenland has not helped, speaking out has not helped, and the diplomatic attempt at dialogue is in vain. Now the international community must react.” 

He added, “Until recently, we could safely trust the Americans, who were our allies and friends, and with whom we liked to work closely. They have shown respect for us as a society, and we have established good cooperative relations that should last for many years.

But that time is over, we must admit, because the new American leadership is completely and utterly indifferent to what we have stood together on so far, because now it is only a matter of them taking over our country over our heads.” 

He noted that in the past, “Yes, the Western allies stood together and helped each other through thick and thin, but things have turned upside down now with the current president in the USA.

But the fact that our other allies in the international community feel like hiding in a small corner and almost whispering that they support us has no effect, and if they do not speak out loudly about how the US is treating Greenland, the situation will escalate day by day, and the American aggression will increase.

So we need our other allies to clearly and distinctly come forward with their support and backing for us.”

Egede believes the visit of Usha Vance most likely accompanied by Mike Waltz is a clear and dangerous provocation, “We are now at a level where it can in no way be characterised as a harmless visit from a politician’s wife, which is in prospect.

Because what is the security advisor doing in Greenland? The only purpose is to show a demonstration of power to us, and the signal is unmistakable.

He is Trump’s confidential and closest advisor, and his presence in Greenland alone will certainly make the Americans believe in Trump’s mission, and the pressure will increase after the visit. So now come up with a Naalakkersuisut capable of making decisions, this is what we need now.”

If there was any confusion about the motivation behind the visit of Usha Vance, which might have been seen as a change of tact of some kind - a charm offensive signalling respect, rather than yet another callous threat, it would be worth remembering when JD Vance took to Fox News recently to say, "Denmark, which controls Greenland, it's not doing its job, and it's not being a good ally, so you have to ask yourself: How are we going to solve that problem, solve our national security? If that means that we need to take more territorial interest in Greenland, that is what President Trump is going to do because he doesn't care about what the Europeans scream at us. He cares about putting the interests of America's citizens first."

Commenting on the developments of 23 March, Dr Dwayne Ryan Menezes, Founder and Managing Director of the London-based international think-tank Polar Research and Policy Initiative stated:

“Given Greenland’s strategic geographic location, abundant resource wealth and importance for US defence and security interests, it is entirely understandable that Trump should see it as representing both an enormous vulnerability and an equally significant opportunity for the US.

The desire to secure the long-term interests of the US in the face of increasing activity by Russia and China in the wider Arctic region is wholly legitimate.

Equally sound is the wish to avert any risk that a future government in Greenland might call into question long-standing defence arrangements the US might have in Greenland, given they are secured by agreements that might now be perceived as having been signed by a foreign power (the US) with a colonial power (Denmark).

Far from being whimsical or irrational, Trump’s recognition of Greenland’s growing strategic importance and his aim to defend and advance US interests reflect soundness, acuity and foresight. 

That is why it is completely inexplicable that he has chosen the most unreasonable way to pursue rather reasonable aims – and indeed the highest-risk way of mitigating emerging risks.

Annexing Greenland is simply not the right strategy. Disrespecting the people of Greenland by saying the US will acquire it “one way or the other” is unhelpful and counter-productive as a tactic.

Exploiting any legitimate grievances that Greenland may have with Denmark to make the case for it joining the US – in essence, replacing one colonial power with another – is a nefarious deployment of the language of decolonisation to justify ambitions of colonial expansion: an unconvincing gimmick at best.

Misrepresenting the aspirations of Greenlanders to mislead the domestic US electorate that many Greenlanders want to be part of the US is more akin to the methods that adversaries deploy to spread disinformation and is disrespectful to both Greenlanders and Americans. In short, the current strategy is doing more harm than good. 

It is important to bear in mind that the US already enjoys extensive defence privileges in Greenland, and Greenland has been a trusted partner and steadfast ally to the US over more than 80 years of close and effective cooperation – through the Second World War, the Cold War and in more recent decades.

Greenlanders have generally been positively disposed to the US, even while ironing out the creases that occasionally appear.

Reestablishing a US Consulate in Nuuk, extending USAID funding to supporting economic development and economic diversification in Greenland, and expanding and adapting the US military base in Greenland were steps in the right direction – a healthy mix of soft and hard power that signalled to Greenland just how important it was to the US without presenting a threat of any kind.

Likewise, the entry of US companies – albeit only a couple – in the mining sector in Greenland was a positive development in a country which has repeatedly said that while it was not for sale, it was open for business, and that it welcomed greater American interest and investment. 

Continuing with measures to cultivate trust and goodwill, while respecting the right of the Greenlandic people to self-determination, would have gone much farther in securing US interests in Greenland than the relentless campaign of disrespect, intimidation and harassment waged against them, so poorly disguised even with the florid use of the rhetoric of liberation.

If Trump is as pragmatic as he claims to be, he would do well to recognise that the current approach is backfiring, realise that the idea of annexation is wholly unnecessary and jettison all talk of it, and reorient US strategy to strengthening the bilateral US-Greenland relationship instead – prioritising alliance over conquest.

Changing course now would do far less damage to his own reputation and America’s standing on the world stage than persisting with these flashes and flexes of toxic cowboy masculinity.

Surely a man smart enough to recognise Greenland’s strategic importance is smart enough to know there is no greater way to weaken America’s hand and hurt its long-term interests than turning its back on its allies, the principal assymetrical advantage it enjoys over its adversaries.”