After Venezuela, Trump’s Gaze Shifts to Greenland: Analysts Warn of a Dangerous Expansionist Turn by the United States
Just days after dramatic US military action in Venezuela, global attention is now shifting northwards, to the icy expanse of Greenland.
Analysts and diplomats increasingly argue that Donald Trump’s renewed focus on acquiring Greenland signals a broader and troubling foreign policy trajectory—one that relies on money, military power, and coercion to dominate smaller and weaker territories.
The White House has confirmed that the Trump administration is actively examining options to acquire Greenland, framing the ambition as a matter of “national security.
The assertion has been met with sharp resistance from Denmark, which retains sovereignty over the autonomous Arctic island.
Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen has categorically stated that Greenland is not for sale, warning that any US military move against the territory would effectively spell the end of the NATO alliance.
Greenland, she emphasised, belongs to its people and remains an integral part of the Kingdom of Denmark.
Strategic Arctic Prize
Once a Danish colony, Greenland today holds immense geopolitical value. Located between North America and Europe, it sits at the heart of the Arctic and overlooks critical sea routes and air corridors.
The US already maintains a major military installation there—the Pituffik Space Base, formerly known as Thule Air Base—which plays a key role in missile detection and early-warning systems.
From Greenland, the US can monitor potential missile threats from Russia, China, and North Korea, while also projecting military power rapidly towards Europe or Asia.
As Arctic ice melts due to climate change, the region is opening up new shipping routes and strategic possibilities, further elevating Greenland’s importance.
Minerals, Power, and Contradictions
Greenland is also rich in rare earth minerals essential for smartphones, electric vehicles, advanced electronics, and modern weapons systems.
These minerals are currently dominated by China in global supply chains, a fact that has long unsettled Washington.
Although Trump has publicly downplayed the role of natural resources—insisting that “we need Greenland for national security, not for minerals”—his own advisers have previously indicated that critical minerals and natural resources lie at the heart of US interest in the island.
This contradiction has fuelled scepticism about Washington’s stated intentions.
Greenland itself has taken steps to limit resource exploitation, including passing a law in 2021 banning uranium mining, reflecting local concerns over environmental and social costs.
A Pattern Emerging After Venezuela
Political analysts argue that Greenland cannot be viewed in isolation. Coming on the heels of the US operation in Venezuela—where President Nicolás Maduro was forcibly taken from his residence—the Greenland rhetoric is being seen as part of a pattern of muscular interventionism.
In this reading, the United States appears to be embracing a policy of territorial aggrandisement, targeting strategically located regions held by comparatively weaker states.
Critics describe this behaviour as that of a modern-day marauder, using overwhelming force and economic leverage to bend international norms to its will.
The Trump administration has also issued threats or applied intense pressure on countries such as Colombia and Iran, further reinforcing fears that unilateral action has replaced diplomacy as Washington’s preferred tool.
Global Fallout and Growing Anxiety
Experts warn that such an annexation-driven mindset risks deepening global divisions, eroding international law, and sowing long-term resentment.
Smaller nations may begin to view US power not as a stabilising force, but as an existential threat—fueling anger, resistance, and even revenge.
The possibility of a NATO member being threatened by another NATO power has particularly alarmed European capitals, raising uncomfortable questions about the future of alliances built on trust and collective security.
Across continents, a single question is being asked with increasing urgency: What happens if the United States does not rein in its current foreign policy? Will the world slide into an era where might makes right, and borders are redrawn by force rather than consent?
For many observers, the turn from Caracas to Greenland is not just about geography—it is about the kind of world order the United States now seeks to shape.
#Greenland #Trump #USForeignPolicy #Expansionism #ArcticPolitics #NATO #GlobalTensions #Venezuela #Geopolitics #WorldOrder
