Greenland Is Not About Ice. It Is About America.
Greenland Is Not About Ice. It Is About America.
Let me tell you something that most people do not want to hear. Greenland is not some frozen wasteland at the top of the world that we should ignore. Greenland is the key to North American security in the twenty-first century, and anyone who cannot see that is either not paying attention or does not want you to understand what is really happening on the global stage.
The world got small. It happened faster than most people realize. When intercontinental ballistic missiles can reach any city on earth in thirty minutes, when satellites can photograph your backyard from space, when hypersonic weapons are being tested by our adversaries, the old rules about geography went out the window. Except they did not. Geography matters more than ever. It just matters differently now.
Greenland is the largest island on the planet. Over eight hundred thirty thousand square miles. More than three times the size of Texas. And fewer people live there than in Kalamazoo, Michigan. In fact, the City of Ocala has approximately 20,000 more residents than Greenland. About fifty-seven thousand souls spread across a handful of coastal settlements, most of them Inuit descendants who have lived there for centuries because they are genetically and culturally adapted to conditions that would kill the rest of us in a week.
Why so empty? The obvious answer is that eighty percent of the island is covered in ice up to two miles thick. The growing season is measured in weeks, not months. The soil, where it exists at all, is ancient bedrock scraped clean by glaciers. Farming is essentially impossible except for a few sheep operations at the southern tip. There are no roads connecting towns. No rail. You get around by boat in summer, by snowmobile and dog sled in winter, and by helicopter or small plane year-round if you can afford it and the weather cooperates. Which it often does not.
The Vikings tried to settle Greenland a thousand years ago during a warm period when the southern coast actually looked somewhat green. Erik the Red named it Greenland as a marketing pitch to convince Icelanders to join him. They showed up, tried to farm, watched the climate turn brutal, and disappeared within a few centuries. And by the way, the Greenland climate switcheroo, was not due to Erik the Red or anything related to the endeavors of Vikings, not matter what Al Gore has to say. And so, the Inuits, the indigenous Arctic and Subarctic residents stayed because they knew how to hunt seals through breathing holes in the ice, how to build kayaks to navigate between ice floes, how to make clothing from caribou hide that actually kept the cold out. And so, the Norse, well they were farmers in a land where farming does not work. They lost.
But here is what matters now. Greenland sits between North America and Europe at the top of the North Atlantic. It is positioned directly in the path of the shortest flight routes between the continental United States and Russia. During the Cold War, we understood this perfectly. We built Thule Air Base in northwest Greenland in 1951. Today it is called Pituffik Space Base, (pronounced bee-doo-FEEK) and understanding what happens there tells you everything you need to know about why Greenland matters.
Pituffik Space Base is not some relic from the Cold War collecting dust. It is one of the most strategically critical military installations in the entire northern hemisphere. The base hosts the northernmost deep-water port in the United States military system. It operates sophisticated ballistic missile early warning radar systems that would detect any intercontinental ballistic missile launch from Russia or anywhere else coming over the polar route toward North America. That radar gives us precious minutes of warning time. In a nuclear exchange, minutes are the difference between a coordinated response and chaos.
And before we continue, always remember and never forget, Putin, the dictator of Russia, has regularly threatened to use nuclear weapons against Ukraine and the United States.
Now, back to Pituffik, which does more than watch for missiles. It is a critical node in our space surveillance network, tracking satellites and debris in orbit, monitoring what our adversaries are doing in space, and supporting military space operations that most Americans never hear, read, or think about. The base also serves as a staging point for Arctic operations, scientific research, and search and rescue missions across the High North. When we talk about controlling the Arctic approaches to North America, Pituffik is where that control lives.
The name change from Thule to Pituffik happened in 2023, reflecting the local Greenlandic name for the area. But do not let the rebranding fool you. The mission has only grown more important as great power competition has intensified. Russia has been rebuilding Soviet-era Arctic bases and expanding its military footprint across the northern latitudes. China, despite having no Arctic territory whatsoever, has declared itself a near-Arctic state and is investing billions in icebreakers, research stations, and infrastructure designed to project power into a region where they have no business being. Pituffik Space Base is our answer to that. It is the eyes and ears of North American defense in the Arctic, and it sits on Danish-controlled territory.
Think about that for a moment. One of the mos t important military installations protecting the American homeland is located on an island controlled by Denmark. A NATO ally that spent decades letting its military rot while American taxpayers footed the bill for European defense.
Now the Danes are finally waking up. Their Prime Minister announced a fifty billion kroner defense package, roughly seven billion dollars over two years, pushing their military budget to three percent of GDP. They are calling it massive rearmament. They plan to rebuild air defense systems, establish a heavy infantry brigade of six thousand soldiers by 2028, and expand naval capabilities. Conscription is extending from four months to eleven months. A ten-year framework promises twenty-two billion dollars through 2033.
Sounds impressive until you do the math. Six thousand soldiers. For context, that would not secure a mid-sized American city. Their own auditors admitted decades of cuts created serious shortcomings. They are not building strength. They are digging out of a hole they created through neglect. And this rearmament is focused on the Baltic and Russia, not the Arctic. Not Greenland.
Denmark cannot project power to Greenland. They cannot secure those sea lanes. They cannot counter Chinese economic infiltration or Russian military posturing in the High North. They are a small nation doing small nation things while sitting on territory that determines the security of an entire hemisphere.
Again, think about that for a moment. One of the most important military installations protecting the American homeland is located on an island controlled by Denmark. A country with a population smaller than Wisconsin. A founding member of NATO that, like most of our European allies, has spent decades letting their military capabilities atrophy while sheltering under the American security umbrella. We built Pituffik. We operate Pituffik. We fund Pituffik. And yet we depend on the continued goodwill of Copenhagen to maintain access.
That is not a sustainable arrangement for a serious nation facing serious threats.
Think about what we need to defend this continent. We need Alaska. We have it. We need Canada as a cooperative partner. We have that, mostly, though Ottawa has its own wobbles. We need the Caribbean secured. We need Mexico stable. We need control of the approaches to North America from every direction, including the one that most Americans forget exists because it is covered in ice. And sitting right there at the top of the Atlantic, controlling the sea lanes between the Arctic and the North Atlantic, is Greenland.
Russia understands geographic strategy. Why do you think they invaded Ukraine? It was not about ancient ethnic grievances or protecting Russian speakers, despite what their propaganda claims. Follow the money. Follow the geography. Ukraine is the buffer between Russia and NATO. It is the agricultural heartland of Eastern Europe. It is the transit route for energy pipelines feeding Western Europe. Russia looked at the map and decided they could not afford to let Ukraine drift permanently into the Western orbit. They miscalculated badly on how easy it would be, but they were not wrong about the underlying strategic logic. Nations that think geographically survive. Nations that think sentimentally get conquered.
China understands this even better. Why are they preparing to take Taiwan? Because Taiwan manufactures the advanced semiconductors that run everything from your smartphone to the guidance systems in our most sophisticated weapons. Because Taiwan sits in the first island chain that could bottle up the Chinese navy in a conflict. Because whoever controls Taiwan controls a massive chunk of global trade routes and the technological supply chains that modern economies depend on. The Chinese Communist Party is playing the long game. They think in decades and centuries while we argue about quarterly earnings and election cycles. They are playing chess on a global board, and they are playing it with geography as their primary consideration.
So when President Trump talked about acquiring Greenland, the establishment laughed. The media mocked him relentlessly. The Europeans clutched their pearls and made offended noises. Denmark acted as though the very suggestion was an insult to their national honor. But here is what none of them wanted to discuss honestly. Trump was right about the strategic importance. He was right that we need to think bigger about North American security. He was right that in a world of great power competition, geographic position matters enormously. The people laughing were the same people who have been wrong about every major geopolitical development of the last thirty years.
Now here is something most Americans do not know, and the Wall Street Journal recently reported on it. We already have a proven model for exactly this kind of strategic arrangement. It has worked successfully for over forty years. It delivers enormous benefits to both sides. And there is no good reason it cannot be applied to Greenland.
Over the past four decades, the United States has maintained Compacts of Free Association with three remote island nations in the Pacific. The Federated States of Micronesia, the Republic of the Marshall Islands, and the Republic of Palau. These are not colonies. These are not territories. These are independent nations that made a strategic choice to align themselves with the United States because they understood the reality of their situation.
The arrangement is elegant in its simplicity. The island nations maintain full independence and self-governance over their domestic affairs. They have their own governments, their own laws, their own national identities. But they receive substantial economic assistance from the United States and access to certain federal programs. Their citizens can live and work freely in America and serve in our military. Many have served with distinction. In return, the United States assumes responsibility for their defense and gains exclusive military access to strategically vital territory.
According to the Congressional Research Service, we provided more than six billion dollars to these three nations through fiscal year 2023. Congress approved another seven point one billion over the next twenty years when the compacts were renewed in 2024. That renewal passed with broad bipartisan support because everyone who actually understands Pacific security knows these agreements are worth every penny.
And what do we get for that investment? We get radar systems in Palau watching the western Pacific. We get missile testing ranges in the Marshall Islands. We get upgraded infrastructure across Micronesia. We get strategic denial, meaning China cannot establish military bases in these territories no matter how much money they throw around. We get forward positioning for any Pacific contingency. We get allies whose citizens serve alongside ours and who understand viscerally that American security and their security are the same thing.
The president of Palau, Surangel Whipps Jr., explained the logic with admirable clarity. There is no way a small nation of eighteen thousand people can have its own navy and army and air force. The best option for a small country is to align with a partner that can provide security. And then he said something that cuts right to the heart of global reality. If we say no to the United States, we are indirectly saying yes to China.
That is the choice facing every small nation in a strategic location. There is no neutral ground. There is no sitting out great power competition. You align with America and the values we represent, or you get pulled into the orbit of authoritarian powers who will not ask your opinion about anything.
Greenland faces exactly the same choice whether its leaders want to acknowledge it or not. A territory of fifty-seven thousand people sitting on critical mineral deposits and irreplaceable strategic geography will be pulled into great power competition. The only question is which power. The only question is whether Greenland's future is determined by Washington or by Beijing and Moscow.
Some people wring their hands about whether Greenlanders would want a compact of free association. Polling shows skepticism. Local leaders say they prefer the status quo with Denmark. The usual chorus of critics warns about antagonizing allies and respecting sovereignty and all the other comfortable pieties that sound wonderful in faculty lounges but mean nothing when missiles are flying.
Let me be direct about this. Fifty-seven thousand people cannot be allowed to hold American national security hostage. That is fewer people than live in most medium-sized American cities. That is a rounding error in geopolitical terms. Greenland's population could fit in a single football stadium with room to spare. The idea that their preferences should override the security requirements of three hundred thirty million Americans and the stability of the entire North Atlantic is not serious thinking. It is the kind of thinking that gets nations conquered.
And let us be honest about Denmark and our NATO allies more broadly. These are not serious military powers. These are nations that have spent decades free-riding on American security guarantees while letting their own defense capabilities wither to the point of irrelevance. Denmark's entire military could not secure a shopping mall against a determined adversary. The broader European contingent of NATO is little better. They talk endlessly about collective defense while spending their money on social programs and expecting American taxpayers to handle the hard work of actually defending the alliance.
If you want to understand the mindset of modern European NATO members, spend some time in Minnesota among the descendants of Scandinavian immigrants. Nice people. Pleasant people. Deeply conflict-averse people who would rather be conquered than cause a scene. That cultural DNA runs straight back to Copenhagen and Stockholm and Oslo. These are not nations that think seriously about hard power and strategic competition. They hope problems will go away if they just act nicely enough. That is not a strategy. That is a prayer.
The United States cannot afford to let Greenland's status be determined by nations that do not take security seriously. We cannot afford to let critical Arctic geography remain under the nominal control of allies who lack the capability or the will to defend it. And we certainly cannot afford to let China and Russia continue making inroads in the Arctic while we defer to the sensitivities of fifty-seven thousand people and their Danish patrons.
Greenland has something else that suddenly matters a great deal. Rare earth minerals. Lithium. Graphite. Uranium. The critical materials we need for batteries, electric vehicles, wind turbines, advanced military systems, and virtually every piece of modern technology. Right now China controls roughly seventy percent of global rare earth production and processing. They have spent decades cornering this market while we were distracted. They have us by the throat on supply chains that our economy and our military depend on absolutely.
And sitting under that Greenlandic ice, becoming more accessible every year as conditions change, are massive deposits of exactly what we need to break Chinese dominance. The minerals are there. The geology is confirmed. What is missing is the infrastructure, the investment, and the political framework to develop those resources under American auspices rather than watching them fall into Chinese hands.
The Chinese know exactly what Greenland is worth. They have been sniffing around for years, trying to buy mining concessions, trying to establish economic footholds, trying to gain influence through the same patient strategy they use everywhere. They offered to build airports. They offered to fund infrastructure. They made all the right noises about economic partnership and mutual benefit. The Danes, to their credit, blocked most of it. But Denmark is a small country with limited leverage, and Greenland wants more autonomy and more economic development. The pressure will continue and intensify.
A compact of free association would solve multiple problems simultaneously. It would bring Greenland firmly into the American security umbrella with clear legal frameworks rather than depending on the goodwill of Copenhagen. It would provide the economic development that Greenland wants and Denmark cannot deliver at sufficient scale. It would secure American access to critical mineral deposits. It would close the northern approaches to our continent against adversary encroachment. It would give Greenlanders a path to genuine self-determination and prosperity rather than remaining a frozen dependency of a small European nation with no strategic vision.
The model works. Forty years of experience in the Pacific proves it works. The recent compact renewals passed Congress with overwhelming bipartisan support because the benefits are obvious to anyone who looks honestly at the situation. Palau and Micronesia and the Marshall Islands are better off than they would be on their own. The United States is more secure than we would be without those agreements. Both sides win.
Greenland could win too if its leaders and their Danish overseers would stop clutching their pearls long enough to see the opportunity. Economic investment that would transform their standard of living. Infrastructure that would connect their isolated communities. Development of mineral resources that would provide jobs and revenue for generations. Full self-governance over domestic affairs. Citizenship pathways to the United States for those who want them. Protection by the most powerful military in human history. That is not colonization. That is partnership. That is a better deal than Denmark has ever offered or ever could offer.
The conversation should focus on Greenland's path to independence followed by free association with the United States. Let them have their referendum. Let them vote for self-determination. And then let them choose their future knowing that the American offer is on the table and that the alternatives are either continued dependency on a small European nation with no strategic weight or eventual absorption into the sphere of authoritarian powers who will not ask their opinion about anything.
The people who criticize Trump's interest in Greenland are the same people who thought we could manage China's rise through engagement and trade. The same people who believed Russia would never actually invade Ukraine because it would be irrational. The same people who have been catastrophically wrong about every major geopolitical development since the Cold War ended. Their track record does not inspire confidence. Their objections should carry no weight.
And now, some historical context with American presidents who understood that geographic expansion is not imperialism. It is survival. The leftist loons today are not rational critics. No, they are loons who howl every time Trump does anything that Makes America Great Again, and history proved the loons from years ago as idiots, wrong every time then and wrong every time now. I’ll prove it.
Thomas Jefferson faced vicious opposition when he negotiated the Louisiana Purchase in 1803. Fifteen million dollars for eight hundred twenty-eight thousand square miles. Federalists called it unconstitutional. They called it Jefferson's Folly. They said the land was worthless wilderness that would bankrupt the treasury and corrupt the republic. Jefferson ignored them. He doubled the size of the nation overnight and secured the Mississippi River and the port of New Orleans. That single transaction made westward expansion possible and transformed a coastal confederation into a continental power. The critics are forgotten. The purchase endures.
William Seward got the same treatment when he negotiated the Alaska purchase from Russia in 1867. Seven point two million dollars for five hundred eighty-six thousand square miles. The newspapers mocked it as Seward's Folly and Seward's Icebox. Critics said we were buying a frozen wasteland of no conceivable value. They could not imagine oil reserves, strategic military positioning, or the Prior approach to Soviet Russia that Alaska would provide during the Cold War. Seward saw what the critics could not. Alaska became a state and an irreplaceable strategic asset.
Harry Truman understood Greenland's value and tried to buy it in 1946, offering Denmark one hundred million dollars. He was not even the first. The State Department explored acquisition as early as 1867, the same year we bought Alaska. Denmark said no both times. But the strategic logic never changed. Truman saw what we see today. Before Truman, Taft gave it a shot, and after Truman, so too did Eisenhower. Greenland controls the northern approaches. Greenland sits astride the shortest routes between America and Eurasia. Greenland matters.
Every major land acquisition in American history was called folly by small thinkers who lacked vision. Jefferson's Folly feeds the nation. Seward's Folly guards our northern flank. Greenland should be next.
America first means thinking clearly and acting decisively on American interests. Greenland, that frozen island that most Americans cannot find on a map, is very much in our interest. The Arctic is opening. The competition is intensifying. Our adversaries are positioning themselves. The question is whether we will act with the strategic vision this moment requires or whether we will defer to the sensitivities of people who do not understand what is at stake.
Fifty-seven thousand people in Greenland. Three hundred thirty million Americans. The math is not complicated. The choice should not be either.
Let me tell you something that most people do not want to hear. Greenland is not some frozen wasteland at the top of the world that we should ignore. Greenland is the key to North American security in the twenty-first century, and anyone who cannot see that is either not paying attention or does not want you to understand what is really happening on the global stage.
The world got small. It happened faster than most people realize. When intercontinental ballistic missiles can reach any city on earth in thirty minutes, when satellites can photograph your backyard from space, when hypersonic weapons are being tested by our adversaries, the old rules about geography went out the window. Except they did not. Geography matters more than ever. It just matters differently now.
Greenland is the largest island on the planet. Over eight hundred thirty thousand square miles. More than three times the size of Texas. And fewer people live there than in Kalamazoo, Michigan. In fact, the City of Ocala has approximately 20,000 more residents than Greenland. About fifty-seven thousand souls spread across a handful of coastal settlements, most of them Inuit descendants who have lived there for centuries because they are genetically and culturally adapted to conditions that would kill the rest of us in a week.
Why so empty? The obvious answer is that eighty percent of the island is covered in ice up to two miles thick. The growing season is measured in weeks, not months. The soil, where it exists at all, is ancient bedrock scraped clean by glaciers. Farming is essentially impossible except for a few sheep operations at the southern tip. There are no roads connecting towns. No rail. You get around by boat in summer, by snowmobile and dog sled in winter, and by helicopter or small plane year-round if you can afford it and the weather cooperates. Which it often does not.
The Vikings tried to settle Greenland a thousand years ago during a warm period when the southern coast actually looked somewhat green. Erik the Red named it Greenland as a marketing pitch to convince Icelanders to join him. They showed up, tried to farm, watched the climate turn brutal, and disappeared within a few centuries. And by the way, the Greenland climate switcheroo, was not due to Erik the Red or anything related to the endeavors of Vikings, not matter what Al Gore has to say. And so, the Inuits, the indigenous Arctic and Subarctic residents stayed because they knew how to hunt seals through breathing holes in the ice, how to build kayaks to navigate between ice floes, how to make clothing from caribou hide that actually kept the cold out. And so, the Norse, well they were farmers in a land where farming does not work. They lost.
But here is what matters now. Greenland sits between North America and Europe at the top of the North Atlantic. It is positioned directly in the path of the shortest flight routes between the continental United States and Russia. During the Cold War, we understood this perfectly. We built Thule Air Base in northwest Greenland in 1951. Today it is called Pituffik Space Base, (pronounced bee-doo-FEEK) and understanding what happens there tells you everything you need to know about why Greenland matters.
Pituffik Space Base is not some relic from the Cold War collecting dust. It is one of the most strategically critical military installations in the entire northern hemisphere. The base hosts the northernmost deep-water port in the United States military system. It operates sophisticated ballistic missile early warning radar systems that would detect any intercontinental ballistic missile launch from Russia or anywhere else coming over the polar route toward North America. That radar gives us precious minutes of warning time. In a nuclear exchange, minutes are the difference between a coordinated response and chaos.
And before we continue, always remember and never forget, Putin, the dictator of Russia, has regularly threatened to use nuclear weapons against Ukraine and the United States.
Now, back to Pituffik, which does more than watch for missiles. It is a critical node in our space surveillance network, tracking satellites and debris in orbit, monitoring what our adversaries are doing in space, and supporting military space operations that most Americans never hear, read, or think about. The base also serves as a staging point for Arctic operations, scientific research, and search and rescue missions across the High North. When we talk about controlling the Arctic approaches to North America, Pituffik is where that control lives.
The name change from Thule to Pituffik happened in 2023, reflecting the local Greenlandic name for the area. But do not let the rebranding fool you. The mission has only grown more important as great power competition has intensified. Russia has been rebuilding Soviet-era Arctic bases and expanding its military footprint across the northern latitudes. China, despite having no Arctic territory whatsoever, has declared itself a near-Arctic state and is investing billions in icebreakers, research stations, and infrastructure designed to project power into a region where they have no business being. Pituffik Space Base is our answer to that. It is the eyes and ears of North American defense in the Arctic, and it sits on Danish-controlled territory.
Think about that for a moment. One of the mos t important military installations protecting the American homeland is located on an island controlled by Denmark. A NATO ally that spent decades letting its military rot while American taxpayers footed the bill for European defense.
Now the Danes are finally waking up. Their Prime Minister announced a fifty billion kroner defense package, roughly seven billion dollars over two years, pushing their military budget to three percent of GDP. They are calling it massive rearmament. They plan to rebuild air defense systems, establish a heavy infantry brigade of six thousand soldiers by 2028, and expand naval capabilities. Conscription is extending from four months to eleven months. A ten-year framework promises twenty-two billion dollars through 2033.
Sounds impressive until you do the math. Six thousand soldiers. For context, that would not secure a mid-sized American city. Their own auditors admitted decades of cuts created serious shortcomings. They are not building strength. They are digging out of a hole they created through neglect. And this rearmament is focused on the Baltic and Russia, not the Arctic. Not Greenland.
Denmark cannot project power to Greenland. They cannot secure those sea lanes. They cannot counter Chinese economic infiltration or Russian military posturing in the High North. They are a small nation doing small nation things while sitting on territory that determines the security of an entire hemisphere.
Again, think about that for a moment. One of the most important military installations protecting the American homeland is located on an island controlled by Denmark. A country with a population smaller than Wisconsin. A founding member of NATO that, like most of our European allies, has spent decades letting their military capabilities atrophy while sheltering under the American security umbrella. We built Pituffik. We operate Pituffik. We fund Pituffik. And yet we depend on the continued goodwill of Copenhagen to maintain access.
That is not a sustainable arrangement for a serious nation facing serious threats.
Think about what we need to defend this continent. We need Alaska. We have it. We need Canada as a cooperative partner. We have that, mostly, though Ottawa has its own wobbles. We need the Caribbean secured. We need Mexico stable. We need control of the approaches to North America from every direction, including the one that most Americans forget exists because it is covered in ice. And sitting right there at the top of the Atlantic, controlling the sea lanes between the Arctic and the North Atlantic, is Greenland.
Russia understands geographic strategy. Why do you think they invaded Ukraine? It was not about ancient ethnic grievances or protecting Russian speakers, despite what their propaganda claims. Follow the money. Follow the geography. Ukraine is the buffer between Russia and NATO. It is the agricultural heartland of Eastern Europe. It is the transit route for energy pipelines feeding Western Europe. Russia looked at the map and decided they could not afford to let Ukraine drift permanently into the Western orbit. They miscalculated badly on how easy it would be, but they were not wrong about the underlying strategic logic. Nations that think geographically survive. Nations that think sentimentally get conquered.
China understands this even better. Why are they preparing to take Taiwan? Because Taiwan manufactures the advanced semiconductors that run everything from your smartphone to the guidance systems in our most sophisticated weapons. Because Taiwan sits in the first island chain that could bottle up the Chinese navy in a conflict. Because whoever controls Taiwan controls a massive chunk of global trade routes and the technological supply chains that modern economies depend on. The Chinese Communist Party is playing the long game. They think in decades and centuries while we argue about quarterly earnings and election cycles. They are playing chess on a global board, and they are playing it with geography as their primary consideration.
So when President Trump talked about acquiring Greenland, the establishment laughed. The media mocked him relentlessly. The Europeans clutched their pearls and made offended noises. Denmark acted as though the very suggestion was an insult to their national honor. But here is what none of them wanted to discuss honestly. Trump was right about the strategic importance. He was right that we need to think bigger about North American security. He was right that in a world of great power competition, geographic position matters enormously. The people laughing were the same people who have been wrong about every major geopolitical development of the last thirty years.
Now here is something most Americans do not know, and the Wall Street Journal recently reported on it. We already have a proven model for exactly this kind of strategic arrangement. It has worked successfully for over forty years. It delivers enormous benefits to both sides. And there is no good reason it cannot be applied to Greenland.
Over the past four decades, the United States has maintained Compacts of Free Association with three remote island nations in the Pacific. The Federated States of Micronesia, the Republic of the Marshall Islands, and the Republic of Palau. These are not colonies. These are not territories. These are independent nations that made a strategic choice to align themselves with the United States because they understood the reality of their situation.
The arrangement is elegant in its simplicity. The island nations maintain full independence and self-governance over their domestic affairs. They have their own governments, their own laws, their own national identities. But they receive substantial economic assistance from the United States and access to certain federal programs. Their citizens can live and work freely in America and serve in our military. Many have served with distinction. In return, the United States assumes responsibility for their defense and gains exclusive military access to strategically vital territory.
According to the Congressional Research Service, we provided more than six billion dollars to these three nations through fiscal year 2023. Congress approved another seven point one billion over the next twenty years when the compacts were renewed in 2024. That renewal passed with broad bipartisan support because everyone who actually understands Pacific security knows these agreements are worth every penny.
And what do we get for that investment? We get radar systems in Palau watching the western Pacific. We get missile testing ranges in the Marshall Islands. We get upgraded infrastructure across Micronesia. We get strategic denial, meaning China cannot establish military bases in these territories no matter how much money they throw around. We get forward positioning for any Pacific contingency. We get allies whose citizens serve alongside ours and who understand viscerally that American security and their security are the same thing.
The president of Palau, Surangel Whipps Jr., explained the logic with admirable clarity. There is no way a small nation of eighteen thousand people can have its own navy and army and air force. The best option for a small country is to align with a partner that can provide security. And then he said something that cuts right to the heart of global reality. If we say no to the United States, we are indirectly saying yes to China.
That is the choice facing every small nation in a strategic location. There is no neutral ground. There is no sitting out great power competition. You align with America and the values we represent, or you get pulled into the orbit of authoritarian powers who will not ask your opinion about anything.
Greenland faces exactly the same choice whether its leaders want to acknowledge it or not. A territory of fifty-seven thousand people sitting on critical mineral deposits and irreplaceable strategic geography will be pulled into great power competition. The only question is which power. The only question is whether Greenland's future is determined by Washington or by Beijing and Moscow.
Some people wring their hands about whether Greenlanders would want a compact of free association. Polling shows skepticism. Local leaders say they prefer the status quo with Denmark. The usual chorus of critics warns about antagonizing allies and respecting sovereignty and all the other comfortable pieties that sound wonderful in faculty lounges but mean nothing when missiles are flying.
Let me be direct about this. Fifty-seven thousand people cannot be allowed to hold American national security hostage. That is fewer people than live in most medium-sized American cities. That is a rounding error in geopolitical terms. Greenland's population could fit in a single football stadium with room to spare. The idea that their preferences should override the security requirements of three hundred thirty million Americans and the stability of the entire North Atlantic is not serious thinking. It is the kind of thinking that gets nations conquered.
And let us be honest about Denmark and our NATO allies more broadly. These are not serious military powers. These are nations that have spent decades free-riding on American security guarantees while letting their own defense capabilities wither to the point of irrelevance. Denmark's entire military could not secure a shopping mall against a determined adversary. The broader European contingent of NATO is little better. They talk endlessly about collective defense while spending their money on social programs and expecting American taxpayers to handle the hard work of actually defending the alliance.
If you want to understand the mindset of modern European NATO members, spend some time in Minnesota among the descendants of Scandinavian immigrants. Nice people. Pleasant people. Deeply conflict-averse people who would rather be conquered than cause a scene. That cultural DNA runs straight back to Copenhagen and Stockholm and Oslo. These are not nations that think seriously about hard power and strategic competition. They hope problems will go away if they just act nicely enough. That is not a strategy. That is a prayer.
The United States cannot afford to let Greenland's status be determined by nations that do not take security seriously. We cannot afford to let critical Arctic geography remain under the nominal control of allies who lack the capability or the will to defend it. And we certainly cannot afford to let China and Russia continue making inroads in the Arctic while we defer to the sensitivities of fifty-seven thousand people and their Danish patrons.
Greenland has something else that suddenly matters a great deal. Rare earth minerals. Lithium. Graphite. Uranium. The critical materials we need for batteries, electric vehicles, wind turbines, advanced military systems, and virtually every piece of modern technology. Right now China controls roughly seventy percent of global rare earth production and processing. They have spent decades cornering this market while we were distracted. They have us by the throat on supply chains that our economy and our military depend on absolutely.
And sitting under that Greenlandic ice, becoming more accessible every year as conditions change, are massive deposits of exactly what we need to break Chinese dominance. The minerals are there. The geology is confirmed. What is missing is the infrastructure, the investment, and the political framework to develop those resources under American auspices rather than watching them fall into Chinese hands.
The Chinese know exactly what Greenland is worth. They have been sniffing around for years, trying to buy mining concessions, trying to establish economic footholds, trying to gain influence through the same patient strategy they use everywhere. They offered to build airports. They offered to fund infrastructure. They made all the right noises about economic partnership and mutual benefit. The Danes, to their credit, blocked most of it. But Denmark is a small country with limited leverage, and Greenland wants more autonomy and more economic development. The pressure will continue and intensify.
A compact of free association would solve multiple problems simultaneously. It would bring Greenland firmly into the American security umbrella with clear legal frameworks rather than depending on the goodwill of Copenhagen. It would provide the economic development that Greenland wants and Denmark cannot deliver at sufficient scale. It would secure American access to critical mineral deposits. It would close the northern approaches to our continent against adversary encroachment. It would give Greenlanders a path to genuine self-determination and prosperity rather than remaining a frozen dependency of a small European nation with no strategic vision.
The model works. Forty years of experience in the Pacific proves it works. The recent compact renewals passed Congress with overwhelming bipartisan support because the benefits are obvious to anyone who looks honestly at the situation. Palau and Micronesia and the Marshall Islands are better off than they would be on their own. The United States is more secure than we would be without those agreements. Both sides win.
Greenland could win too if its leaders and their Danish overseers would stop clutching their pearls long enough to see the opportunity. Economic investment that would transform their standard of living. Infrastructure that would connect their isolated communities. Development of mineral resources that would provide jobs and revenue for generations. Full self-governance over domestic affairs. Citizenship pathways to the United States for those who want them. Protection by the most powerful military in human history. That is not colonization. That is partnership. That is a better deal than Denmark has ever offered or ever could offer.
The conversation should focus on Greenland's path to independence followed by free association with the United States. Let them have their referendum. Let them vote for self-determination. And then let them choose their future knowing that the American offer is on the table and that the alternatives are either continued dependency on a small European nation with no strategic weight or eventual absorption into the sphere of authoritarian powers who will not ask their opinion about anything.
The people who criticize Trump's interest in Greenland are the same people who thought we could manage China's rise through engagement and trade. The same people who believed Russia would never actually invade Ukraine because it would be irrational. The same people who have been catastrophically wrong about every major geopolitical development since the Cold War ended. Their track record does not inspire confidence. Their objections should carry no weight.
And now, some historical context with American presidents who understood that geographic expansion is not imperialism. It is survival. The leftist loons today are not rational critics. No, they are loons who howl every time Trump does anything that Makes America Great Again, and history proved the loons from years ago as idiots, wrong every time then and wrong every time now. I’ll prove it.
Thomas Jefferson faced vicious opposition when he negotiated the Louisiana Purchase in 1803. Fifteen million dollars for eight hundred twenty-eight thousand square miles. Federalists called it unconstitutional. They called it Jefferson's Folly. They said the land was worthless wilderness that would bankrupt the treasury and corrupt the republic. Jefferson ignored them. He doubled the size of the nation overnight and secured the Mississippi River and the port of New Orleans. That single transaction made westward expansion possible and transformed a coastal confederation into a continental power. The critics are forgotten. The purchase endures.
William Seward got the same treatment when he negotiated the Alaska purchase from Russia in 1867. Seven point two million dollars for five hundred eighty-six thousand square miles. The newspapers mocked it as Seward's Folly and Seward's Icebox. Critics said we were buying a frozen wasteland of no conceivable value. They could not imagine oil reserves, strategic military positioning, or the Prior approach to Soviet Russia that Alaska would provide during the Cold War. Seward saw what the critics could not. Alaska became a state and an irreplaceable strategic asset.
Harry Truman understood Greenland's value and tried to buy it in 1946, offering Denmark one hundred million dollars. He was not even the first. The State Department explored acquisition as early as 1867, the same year we bought Alaska. Denmark said no both times. But the strategic logic never changed. Truman saw what we see today. Before Truman, Taft gave it a shot, and after Truman, so too did Eisenhower. Greenland controls the northern approaches. Greenland sits astride the shortest routes between America and Eurasia. Greenland matters.
Every major land acquisition in American history was called folly by small thinkers who lacked vision. Jefferson's Folly feeds the nation. Seward's Folly guards our northern flank. Greenland should be next.
America first means thinking clearly and acting decisively on American interests. Greenland, that frozen island that most Americans cannot find on a map, is very much in our interest. The Arctic is opening. The competition is intensifying. Our adversaries are positioning themselves. The question is whether we will act with the strategic vision this moment requires or whether we will defer to the sensitivities of people who do not understand what is at stake.
Fifty-seven thousand people in Greenland. Three hundred thirty million Americans. The math is not complicated. The choice should not be either.