Trump says US has ‘permanent control’ of Greenland security: Does it? | Military News
Trump Announces Agreement with Denmark on Greenland Security
United States President Donald Trump has announced a deal with Denmark that reportedly grants the U.S. “permanent control” over Greenland’s security and other needs. This announcement follows Trump’s controversial remarks last year when he suggested the U.S. might seek to buy the self-governing Arctic territory, which is part of Denmark, causing friction within the NATO alliance.
Denmark indicated that the formal signing of the agreement will take place during the upcoming United Nations General Assembly meeting in New York. Copenhagen emphasized that it maintains sovereignty over Greenland and noted that the deal will require approval from both the Danish and Greenlandic parliaments.
Details of the deal have not been fully disclosed, but Trump indicated that it allows the U.S. to control Greenland’s security and other needs at no cost. He stated the agreement prevents U.S. adversaries from establishing military bases or making sensitive investments in Greenland without U.S. consent. A representative from the U.S. Department of State further explained that the agreement will prohibit non-NATO countries from setting up bases in Greenland or engaging in investments that could pose a threat to the United States, specifically mentioning China and Russia.
Mikkel Olesen, a senior researcher at the Danish Institute for International Studies, expressed skepticism about the significance of these restrictions, arguing that Denmark and Greenland never desired a military presence from either country. The implications of defining which nations may be considered adversaries remain unclear.
Trump referred to the agreement as an “‘Infinite Life’ Agreement,” suggesting that it will not have an expiration date. According to the State Department, the deal grants the U.S. the right to construct military facilities on the island without requiring approval from Greenland or Denmark. Notably, the agreement would remain intact even if Greenland were to gain independence in the future.
While the deal does not explicitly mention mining rights for rare-earth minerals in Greenland, observers suggest that Trump may be referring to such investments with his comments on “sensitive investments.” Greenland is known to have rich deposits of valuable minerals, which are increasingly sought after as global demand for technology and renewable energy rises.
Both Denmark and Greenland acknowledged the agreement on Friday, though they did not provide specific details about its terms. Greenland’s Prime Minister Jens-Frederik Nielsen stated that it “recognizes Greenland’s interests” and is “to the benefit of us all.” Denmark’s Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen characterized the deal as advantageous for NATO and Europe, reinforcing security in the Arctic and North Atlantic.
Olesen cautioned that the details of the agreement remain vague, and much of the available information has originated from U.S. sources.
Importantly, the deal does not confer ownership of Greenland to the U.S., a prospect that had been previously expressed by Trump. Frederiksen confirmed that the agreement “recognizes the sovereignty and territorial integrity” of Denmark and the rights of the Greenlandic people.
Olesen noted that the deal may help alleviate the tensions that arose from Trump’s earlier attempts to acquire Greenland, without undermining existing sovereignty. A January 2025 poll indicated that 85% of Greenlanders opposed becoming part of the United States.
Under a 1951 treaty, the U.S. already possesses significant military rights in Greenland, including the ability to maintain bases and personnel. The U.S. currently operates the Pituffik Space Base, which is staffed by over 100 personnel.
The practicality of the new agreement remains uncertain. While Trump mentioned an immediate buildup of U.S. military presence in Greenland, it appears that many objectives could have been achieved through diplomatic means. Observers believe that the deal may address internal tensions within NATO while avoiding formal annexation of the territory by the U.S.
