Key takeaways
• CNN commentator Stephen Collinson spots a major flaw in Trump’s Greenland argument.
• President Trump argues U.S. security demands control of Greenland.
• Collinson says the U.S. can already defend the island without buying it.
• Greenland offers new sea routes and rich mineral deposits.
• Denmark and Greenland would welcome U.S. partnerships—but not a takeover.
U.S. President Donald Trump has proposed buying Greenland. He claims this move would boost American national security. Yet CNN commentator Stephen Collinson argues that Trump’s main point contains a major flaw. He says the U.S. already has all it needs to safeguard Greenland right now. However, the push for Greenland may stem as much from its resources as from defense. Melting ice is opening new shipping routes there. Also, Greenland holds rare earth minerals and oil prospects that could power future technology and energy projects.
Why Greenland’s Location Is Key
Greenland sits at the top of the world. As global temperatures rise, its ice is melting. This change is carving out faster sea lanes between North America, Europe, and Asia. Military ships and planes could use these routes to cut travel time by days or weeks. Meanwhile, rivals like China and Russia eye Greenland’s strategic value. They know that influence or control there could shift the balance of power. Therefore, the U.S. sees the island as crucial to its future defense plans.
A Flawed Greenland Security Claim
Collinson argues that Trump’s security claim falls short. He points out that the U.S. already operates a key base on Greenland. American jets and Danish troops patrol the island today. If Trump truly fears a threat, he can send more forces and equipment there immediately. In his view, buying all of Greenland is unnecessary for national defense. Instead, the U.S. could simply strengthen its existing presence, without the complexity of a purchase.
Greenland’s Mineral Potential
Beyond its military importance, Greenland is rich in resources. As the permafrost thaws, mining becomes easier. The island sits on vast deposits of rare earth elements. These metals power smartphones, electric cars, and guided missiles. Greenland may also hide offshore oil and gas fields. In past talks about Venezuela, Trump suggested oil executives would fund U.S. control. In Greenland’s case, its mineral wealth could prove just as tempting.
Denmark and Greenland Open to Deals
Collinson stresses that Denmark and Greenland would welcome U.S. investment. Greenlanders enjoy self-rule under the Danish kingdom. Both governments have voiced openness to partnership agreements on mining and drilling. They see foreign investment as key to jobs and growth. Still, Collinson warns that Trump shows no sign of sharing resource rights. He might seek total control rather than joint ventures. This refusal to share could stall any serious negotiations.
What’s Next for Trump’s Greenland Bid
So where do things go from here? For one, Denmark has already rejected the idea of selling Greenland. Greenlanders themselves oppose being handed off to the U.S. Most polls show locals prefer to stay under Danish rule or move toward full independence. Trump has joked about a price tag near a trillion dollars, but Denmark refuses to discuss any sale. Instead, Washington may shift toward defense pacts or resource deals. Yet outright American ownership is unlikely in the near future.
Political Reactions and Global Impact
Critics call Trump’s push for Greenland a throwback to colonial thinking. Collinson notes that the president’s approach resembles 19th-century U.S. land grabs and tariff wars. Today, international law protects territories like Greenland. The United Nations and NATO both list the island as Danish. Any forced transfer would spark a diplomatic and legal firestorm. It might also provoke China and Russia to deepen their own Greenland ties, heightening global tensions.
The Flaw in Trump’s Empire Vision
Collinson sums up the flaw clearly: if defense is America’s goal, it already has the means to secure Greenland. If minerals and routes are the draw, Greenland’s leaders want U.S. companies on friendly terms. The only missing piece is Trump’s willingness to share benefits. Instead of asking to buy the island, he could pursue faster, simpler agreements. By focusing on ownership, he overlooks these more practical options.
Greenland’s Future Role
As its ice melts, Greenland is transforming fast. The island may emerge as a hub for climate science, green energy, or resource extraction. Greenlanders balance hope for jobs with caution against outside exploitation. They demand fair contracts and strong environmental rules. Industry experts foresee deals with major mining and oil firms. Yet diplomats warn that any large-scale U.S. purchase remains more fantasy than fact.
Conclusion
Trump’s Greenland plan has stirred headlines and debate. Analyst Stephen Collinson cuts through the noise: America already holds the tools to defend Greenland and tap its resources. By pushing for outright ownership, Trump ignores quicker, less controversial paths. While U.S.-Greenland partnerships may grow, a full takeover remains highly doubtful.
Frequently Asked Questions
Why does Trump want Greenland?
Trump says that a U.S. purchase would strengthen American security. He also sees Greenland’s new shipping routes and rich mineral deposits as key assets.
Can the U.S. legally buy Greenland?
Greenland is part of the Kingdom of Denmark under international law. Any sale would need approval from Denmark and Greenland’s self-rule government, which seems unlikely.
What resources are in Greenland?
Greenland holds rare earth minerals that power high-tech devices, as well as potential offshore oil and gas fields. Ice melt is revealing new mining opportunities.
How do Greenlanders feel about U.S. ownership?
Most Greenland residents oppose being sold or transferred. They prefer to stay connected to Denmark or pursue full independence, rather than join the U.S.