Taking over Greenland by America in 4 steps; A complicated but possible action

According to Isna, US President Donald Trump wants the United States to take over Greenland; A strategic island rich in mineral resources, but the problem is that Greenland belongs to Denmark and most Greenlanders do not want to become part of the United States.

Politico magazine wrote with this introduction in a report: While the attack on the capital of Greenland, Nook, and its capture in the style of Venezuela seems fanciful, there is a clear path, and it seems that Trump has already taken this path.

According to a Danish politician who asked not to be named, “It could be done with maybe five helicopters. He will not need many military presence. “The Greenlanders will not be able to do anything.”

Politico spoke with nine European Union officials, NATO insiders, defense experts and diplomats to examine how the U.S. seized the mineral-rich, strategically important Arctic island.

“It could be with five helicopters… He doesn’t need a lot of troops,” said a Danish politician who asked not to be named. “There is nothing they (the Greenlanders) can do.” And worryingly for the Danes, he seems to have started…

Step 1: Influence campaign to strengthen the Greenland independence movement

This publication called the first step “Establishing an influence campaign to strengthen the incentive of Greenland’s dependence” and wrote about it: Since the beginning of its work, the Trump administration has raised the issue of Greenland’s independence from Denmark in order to facilitate direct contracts with the United States. Polls show that the majority of Greenlanders are in favor of independence, but this process requires holding a referendum and an agreement with Copenhagen. A poll conducted in 2025 showed that 56% of Greenlanders support independence and 28% oppose it.

Meanwhile, Danish media reports suggest covert infiltration operations by people associated with Trump on the island, and Denmark’s security service has warned that Greenland has been targeted by various infiltration campaigns.

Experts believe that the tactics used by the United States will probably be a combination of field activities such as cooperation with aligned extremist groups, the network of citizens living abroad in these countries, and extensive online operations through the media with the aim of creating an exaggerated image of the popularity of a particular option and inducing a sense of its inevitability.

The US seems to be using some of these methods in the case of Greenland. Senior Trump officials, such as his deputy chief of staff, Steven Miller, are confident that there will be no military battle over Greenland’s future. US Vice President J.D. Vance also emphasized the “right to self-determination” of its people by visiting the island last March, but at the same time expressed hope that the island will choose partnership with the United States, because according to his claim, Washington will respect their national sovereignty and security.

Step 2: Offer Greenland a sweet deal

In the continuation of this article, the American media called the second step “a tempting agreement proposal to Greenland” and explained: If the American efforts to accelerate the holding of a referendum on Greenland’s independence succeed and its people vote to separate from Denmark, the next step will be to influence this territory. The annexation of Greenland as a new US state is a proposal that has recently been proposed by officials close to Trump. But in the aforementioned survey, 85% of the people of Greenland and even the pro-independence factions of this island were against it.

A more likely option would be to enter into a “treaty of free association” similar to the US agreements with some Oceanic island nations, including Micronesia, the Marshall Islands and Palau, which would provide the US with unrestricted military access to Greenland territory in exchange for services, support and free trade. Some Greenland independence politicians evaluate this option more positively than the current relations with Denmark.

However, Thomas Crosby, an assistant professor of military operations at the Royal Danish Defense College, warns of the consequences of such a deal with the Trump administration. Referring to Trump’s background in imposing his demands in negotiations and violating his commitments, he emphasized that Greenland will be in a weak position in the face of him and that an agreement based on future promises, especially in exchange for the transfer of territorial sovereignty, will be a reckless and risky action for the people of this island.

The third step: Bringing Europe together

In the explanation of the third step – “Bringing Europe together”, this report wrote: America is using the situation of the Ukraine crisis as a trump card to get Europe’s agreement with its influence in Greenland. An unnamed European diplomat suggests a scenario of a “security for security” deal, whereby Europe would accept a larger US presence and role in Greenland in exchange for Trump’s stronger, long-term security guarantees for Ukraine.

Although this option is unpleasant for Europe, it is considered as a way to avoid the possible consequences of opposing Trump. The main concern is Trump’s possible retaliation, which may appear through the imposition of sanctions, withdrawal from the Ukraine peace talks, or support for Putin’s positions, and could further threaten the stability of Europe.

Fourth step: military attack

In the last part of this article, Politico called the fourth step “military attack” and wrote: If Greenland or Denmark resist Trump’s demand, the possibility of direct military action by the United States will be possible due to the weak defense of this island. Lynn Mortensgaard, a researcher at the Danish International Studies Institute and an expert on Greenland’s security, says that the United States can take control of Greenland in “less than half an hour” by referring to the current presence of American troops in the country’s bases on this Arctic island. American military forces enter Greenland and the Trump administration declares it to be American. This is similar to Putin’s strategy in Ukraine and placing the island in a “deed is done” situation. Any such action would have no legal basis under US and international law. Any occupation for more than 60 days will require the approval of the US Congress.

The consequences of such an attack will be very heavy for America; Ben Hodges, the former commander of US forces in Europe, warned that this move would mean the end of NATO and the loss of key European allies, which could reduce security intelligence sharing and limit US access to military bases in Europe. Although NATO would probably not be able to show a collective response due to the US veto, European countries could be present through regional defense frameworks such as the Anglo-Scandinavian Joint Expeditionary Force in Greenland.

A senior NATO diplomat said that despite these alarming scenarios, NATO officials do not believe an attack is imminent and that the atmosphere is more indicative of an attempt at difficult political negotiations.

end of message