Market Updates

Greenland Update January 2026

Summary

The relationship between the United States and its European allies has been strained by renewed U.S. efforts to acquire Greenland, an autonomous territory of Denmark. As of January 2026, President Donald Trump has escalated tensions by threatening tariffs on several European nations unless they facilitate the “complete and total purchase” of the island. This move has prompted condemnation from European leaders, potential retaliatory trade measures, and deployments of European military personnel to Greenland. Rooted in historical U.S. interests in the Arctic region for strategic, security, and resource purposes, the current crisis risks undermining NATO cohesion and transatlantic relations.

Historical Background

U.S. interest in acquiring Greenland dates back to the mid-19th century, driven by its strategic location in the Arctic and potential resources. During the Cold War, the U.S. established the Thule Air Base under a 1951 defense agreement with Denmark, which grants the U.S. military access to the island for defense purposes. This agreement has allowed ongoing U.S. presence, including radar systems critical for missile defense and monitoring Russian activities in the Arctic.

In 2019, during his first term, President Trump publicly expressed interest in purchasing Greenland, citing national security concerns amid growing Chinese and Russian influence in the region. Danish officials dismissed the idea as “absurd,” leading to diplomatic friction, including the cancellation of a planned state visit to Denmark. Despite this, the U.S. reopened a consulate in Nuuk, Greenland’s capital, in 2020 to bolster ties and monitor investments, particularly in rare earth minerals essential for technology and defense.

Post-2020, U.S.-Denmark relations focused on expanded cooperation, including joint Arctic security initiatives and infrastructure development. Denmark has repeatedly offered to enhance U.S. and NATO access to Greenland without transferring sovereignty, emphasizing Greenland’s status as part of the Kingdom of Denmark. However, climate change has amplified Greenland’s importance, with melting ice opening new shipping routes and exposing mineral deposits, heightening competition from global powers.

Current Developments (as of January 2026)

In his second term, President Trump has revived and intensified efforts to acquire Greenland. On January 17, 2026, Trump announced via Truth Social that the U.S. would impose 10% tariffs on goods from eight European countries—Denmark, Norway, Sweden, France, Germany, the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, and Finland—effective February 1, 2026, escalating to 25% by June 1 unless a deal is reached for the U.S. to purchase Greenland. This threat followed European nations’ deployment of small military contingents to Greenland in response to U.S. rhetoric suggesting possible annexation by force.

Trump has framed the acquisition as essential for U.S. national security, arguing that only American control can prevent Chinese or Russian dominance in the Arctic. He has linked the push to personal grievances, including his failure to win the Nobel Peace Prize, and appointed officials like Louisiana Governor Jeff Landry as special envoy to Greenland to advance the agenda. U.S. officials, including Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, have reiterated that Greenland is a “strategic asset” fundamental to American interests.

In response, European leaders convened emergency meetings in Brussels on January 18, 2026, to discuss countermeasures. The European Union is considering activating its “Anti-Coercion Instrument” (ACI), potentially imposing retaliatory tariffs worth up to $108 billion on U.S. products. Meanwhile, a U.S. congressional delegation visited Denmark to de-escalate tensions, amid domestic polls showing 86% of Americans oppose taking Greenland by force.

Key Issues and Tensions

The core issues revolve around sovereignty, security, and economic coercion:

  • Sovereignty and International Law: Greenland’s autonomous status under Denmark makes any forced acquisition a violation of international norms. Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen has warned that U.S. takeover could “spell the end of NATO,” as it would involve one member annexing territory from another. European leaders, including UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer and French President Emmanuel Macron, have labeled the tariff threats “unacceptable” and “completely wrong,” viewing them as blackmail.
  • Security and Geopolitics: The U.S. cites threats from China and Russia, who have shown interest in Arctic resources. However, Denmark argues that existing agreements suffice and has increased its own military presence. European deployments to Greenland signal solidarity but risk escalation.
  • Economic Coercion: Trump’s tariffs weaponize trade against allies, potentially derailing recent U.S.-EU and U.S.-UK trade deals. Europe fears a “dangerous downward spiral” in transatlantic relations.
  • Greenlandic Perspectives: Greenland’s government prioritizes self-determination and has expressed willingness for U.S. investment but rejects sale. Local concerns include environmental impacts from resource extraction.

Responses from Involved Parties

  • United States: The administration remains adamant, with Trump stating he is “100% committed” to the tariffs and acquisition. Some U.S. officials hint at force as a last resort, though this is unpopular domestically.
  • Europe and Denmark: Leaders advocate for de-escalation while preparing countermeasures. German Chancellor Friedrich Merz emphasized a “united” response, and the EU is exploring retaliatory options. Denmark has classified the U.S. as a potential security threat.
  • NATO and International Community: The crisis tests NATO’s unity, with fears of broader implications for alliances.

Implications

This dispute could lead to a trade war, weakening economic ties and NATO. It may accelerate Europe’s push for strategic autonomy, including in defense and Arctic policy. For the U.S., failure could damage credibility, while success might encourage similar coercive tactics elsewhere. Globally, it highlights Arctic tensions amid climate change.

Conclusion

The U.S.-Europe rift over Greenland represents a confluence of historical ambitions, current geopolitical rivalries, and economic pressures. While diplomatic off-ramps exist through enhanced cooperation, the aggressive U.S. stance risks
long-term damage to alliances. Monitoring developments in the coming weeks will be crucial as tariffs loom.

Download PDF

References

Adviser believes that the content provided by third parties and/or linked content is reasonably reliable and does not contain untrue statements of material fact, or misleading information. This content may be dated.

The opinions expressed herein are those of the firm and are subject to change without notice. The opinions referenced are as of the date of publication and are subject to change due to changes in the market or economic conditions and may not necessarily come to pass. Any opinions, projections, or forward-looking statements expressed herein are solely those of author, may differ from the views or opinions expressed by other areas of the firm, and are only for general informational purposes as of the date indicated.

Roan Capital Partners is a registered investment advisor located in the State of Tennessee. The information presented is for educational purposes only and does not intend to make an offer or solicitation for the sale or purchase of any specific securities, investments, or investment strategies. Investments involve risk and, unless otherwise stated, are not guaranteed. Be sure to first consult with a qualified financial adviser and/or tax professional before implementing any strategy discussed herein. Past performance is not indicative of future performance.