A lucrative minerals deal between Europe and Greenland has set the stage for a geopolitical ball game. Yet the real losers could be the Greenlandic people themselves.
The recent agreement has delivered a sharp rebuke to Donald Trump’s ambitions, coming amid reports of US spies targeting Greenland’s independence movement.
As the U.S. and EU compete for influence, Greenland risks becoming collateral damage in a power struggle that could destabilise its fragile society.
The best path forward seems to be greater autonomy, multilateral partnerships, and a firm rejection of great-power coercion.
A Growing Wedge in Greenlandic Society
Greenland’s population – just 56,000 people – is already navigating complex questions about its future.
While many seek independence from Denmark, few wish to exchange Danish oversight for domination by other powers.
Trump’s threats of annexation and the spy friction have heightened anxieties, creating a climate of suspicion that European investment alone cannot dispel.
The minerals deal, while economically beneficial, introduces new tensions.
Some view it as a step toward sovereignty, while others worry it merely substitutes EU influence for Danish control.
There’s a division that could deepen if external pressures – whether US tariffs or European economic conditions – force Greenland into choosing sides.
The Perils of Great-Power Rivalry
History offers sobering lessons about small nations caught between competing powers.
Greenland’s strategic location and mineral wealth make it attractive to both Washington and Brussels.
However, neither has demonstrated sufficient commitment to Greenlandic self-determination.
Trump’s transactional ways treat the island as a resource to be acquired, while Europe’s engagement, though more diplomatic, still prioritises access to minerals over equitable partnership.
The danger is that this competition could distort Greenland’s development.
As Trump slowly abandons Ukraine and undermines NATO, Greenland risks becoming another flashpoint in deteriorating transatlantic relations.
The presence of a U.S. military base and Europe’s growing economic footprint could turn the island into the next proxy battleground.
Toward True Autonomy and Balanced Partnerships
Greenland’s future stability depends on resisting binary alliances.
The first step is securing full control over foreign and defense policy from Denmark, eliminating Copenhagen's role as an intermediary.
This would allow Nuuk to negotiate directly with Washington and Brussels from a position of strength.
Equally important is diversifying partnerships beyond the U.S. and EU. Greenland should naturally engage with Canada, Norway, and other Arctic nations to avoid overreliance on any single power.
While the EU deal shows promise, future agreements must include robust safeguards for environmental protection and local benefit.
The recent mining agreement demonstrates Greenland's ability to attract investment on favourable terms.
Going forward, all such deals should prioritise Greenland’s long-term interests – not just short-term gains for foreign corporations.
This means strict environmental regulations, fair revenue sharing, and meaningful participation by Greenlandic businesses.
A Test for Greenland – and the West
The U.S. and EU both profess support for Greenland’s autonomy, but their actions sound like competing agendas.
If both sides genuinely respect Greenland’s right to self-determination, they should endorse multilateral frameworks that allow the island to engage with multiple partners without coercion.
For Greenland, the challenge is to navigate this rivalry without being consumed by it.
The world will be watching to see whether it becomes another contested frontier in a new cold war, or a model for how small nations can assert their sovereignty.
The answer depends on Greenland’s leaders, and whether the West’s actions match its rhetoric about true autonomy.
As the Arctic becomes increasingly relevant, Greenland’s choices will resonate far beyond mineral extraction.
They will test whether true self-rule is possible in an era of renewed great-power competition – and whether small countries can chart their own course when caught between competing blocs.
Keep up with Daily Euro Times for more updates!
Read also:
Greenland: Do Friends Spy on Each Other?
Greenland Not for Sale: Denmark Rejects Trump’s Offer
Iceland and the EU: A New Stage in Strategic Partnership
