US Vice-President JD Vance convenes a high-level meeting at the White House on 14 January with the top foreign ministers of Denmark and Greenland, alongside US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, as Washington applies pressure over Greenland’s future. What began as a bizarre and once-dismissed idea — that America might somehow acquire or annex Greenland — has hardened into a diplomatic challenge, drawing allies into a high-stakes White House discussion at a time when strategic competition in the Arctic is rising.
In Copenhagen on Tuesday, Greenland’s Prime Minister Jens Frederik Nielsen and Denmark’s Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen struck a blunt tone ahead of the talks, insisting that Greenland “is not for sale,” that it does not want to be part of the United States, and that if forced to choose “between the US and Denmark here and now, then we choose Denmark.” Their comments, couched in diplomatic language, nevertheless underscored extraordinary strain in relations with the US over the island’s future.
Denmark has described recent US statements — including by President Donald Trump — as “unacceptable pressure” from a close ally. Ms Frederiksen added that Copenhagen wishes to cooperate on security and defence, but only “on the basis of the fundamental rules of sovereignty.”
Arctic stakes and strategic value
At the heart of the tension is Greenland’s strategic value. Its vast territory commands key sea lanes opening with climate change, hosts important military infrastructure, and potentially sits atop untapped natural resources. Trump has repeatedly argued the US “needs Greenland for national security,” with rhetoric veering into suggestions of force — the so-called easy way or the hard way — alarming European capitals.
Vice-President JD Vance, meanwhile, urged observers not to dismiss Trump’s statements as idle rhetoric, warning that allies should “take the President seriously” on Greenland. By hosting the Danish and Greenlandic foreign ministers, together with Secretary of State Rubio, Mr Vance has elevated the discussion to the highest level short of presidential intervention, signalling both US resolve and urgency.
You might be interested
Spooked
The timing is striking. While Europe, NATO, and the US are managing Russian and Chinese assertiveness, an internal dispute over a close ally’s sovereign territory has sparked concern. Many officials, though putting a brave face on it, have felt rattled by the US rhetoric, which warns that any unilateral attempt to alter Greenland’s status could threaten NATO cohesion — a reminder of how rhetoric alone can unsettle long-standing alliance assumptions.
For Greenlanders themselves, the issue has crystallised what once seemed fringe speculation into a deeply personal concern. Residents in Nuuk and elsewhere insist that their future should be decided within the Kingdom of Denmark and in consultation with citizens. The charge: for some this is just or little more than an additional piece of land, but for Greenlanders it is home.
Diplomacy in uncharted waters
Wednesday’s talks will test whether diplomacy can de-escalate what has become one of the most surreal rifts in recent memory — a crisis born of Trumpian rhetoric, amplified by fellow members of his administration, and played out against NATO and EU strategic challenges. Officials – concretely the foreign ministers of Denmark and Greenland – are expected to seek common ground and prevent further escalation, aiming to stop the dispute from bleeding into wider NATO tensions.
By this point, it is difficult to gauge just how serious Mr Trump is, as he often escalates rhetoric sharply before accepting compromise — a pattern allies are all too familiar with. In many ways, keeping partners aligned may be more important than scoring rhetorical victories. Mr Vance’s past interactions, notably his now infamous February 2025 Oval Office remarks to President Zelenskyy admonishing him for allegedly “not saying thank you enough,” add an unpredictable element to an already delicate negotiation. Worse, just hours ahead of the meeting, Mr Vance’s boss chimed in again on his social network saying anything less than US control was “unacceptable”.
