What the US Must Do Differently to Purchase Greenland

The United States has coveted Greenland for more than 150 years. Exploratory ideas emerged in the 1860s, followed by a formal $100 million offer in 1946 under President Harry Truman. Each attempt failed, thwarted by Denmark’s firm grip on sovereignty and Greenland’s rising autonomy.

Now, in January 2026, President Donald Trump’s second term has resurrected the idea, casting it as a national security imperative amid intensifying Arctic rivalry with Russia and China. White House officials, including Secretary of State Marco Rubio, have signaled a preference for negotiation over military action, though hints of force remain as leverage.

With Denmark and Greenland repeatedly declaring the island “not for sale,” success demands a sharper, more sophisticated strategy than past efforts. Drawing on historical failures, expert insights, and current geopolitics, here are five key steps the US could take, emphasizing diplomacy, mutual incentives, and respect for self-determination over coercion.

1. Engage Directly with Greenlanders and Spell Out the Life-Changing Benefits of US Affiliation

Previous bids treated Greenland as a Danish possession, sidelining its people’s agency. Since achieving self-rule in 2009, the government in Nuuk controls key internal matters, including resources and potential independence debates.

To build genuine support, the US must go beyond one-time payouts and clearly articulate the transformative, long-term advantages that closer ties, or eventual integration as a US territory or state, could bring to Greenland’s approximately 57,000 residents, who are predominantly Inuit.

Short-term incentives remain powerful: recent reports suggest White House discussions of direct individual payments ($10,000–$100,000 per person) to ease economic dependence on Denmark’s annual $600 million subsidy. But the real appeal lies in sustained prosperity and opportunity.

If Greenland were to join the United States (similar to Alaska after its 1867 purchase or the US Virgin Islands in 1917), residents could gain:

• • US citizenship with full passport rights, freedom to live and work anywhere in the United States, and access to federal programs.
  • Dramatically improved healthcare and education: world-class hospitals, scholarships to top US universities, and vocational training programs that far exceed current options.
  • Economic boom: massive US investment in infrastructure (modern airports, roads, renewable energy grids, deep-water ports) and responsible resource development, creating high-paying jobs in mining, tourism, fisheries, and technology while raising per-capita income well above current levels.
  • Security and stability: ironclad US military protection and disaster-response capabilities, critical as climate change accelerates ice melt and opens new shipping routes.
  • Social benefits: eligibility for Social Security, Medicare (upon qualification), veterans’ benefits for those who serve, and federal disaster relief—benefits that have lifted standards of living in other US territories.

These gains should be paired with unbreakable guarantees preserving Inuit language, culture, land rights, and local governance: modeled on Alaska’s Native corporations or Puerto Rico’s commonwealth status. Targeted investments in housing, schools, and health clinics in Nuuk and smaller communities would demonstrate immediate commitment.

Although polls currently show ~85% opposition, transparent campaigns highlighting these life-changing benefits, through town halls, media partnerships, and engagements with leaders like Prime Minister Jens-Frederik Nielsen, could gradually shift public sentiment.

2. Offer Denmark an Irresistible Economic Package

Denmark’s rejections have rooted in national pride and historic bonds, but a compelling financial deal could change the calculus. The 1946 offer, equivalent to about $1.6 billion today, was generous for its era but ignored postwar realities.

Today, the US should propose a multi-billion-dollar package (estimates range from $10-50 billion), accounting for Greenland’s rare-earth minerals, fisheries, and strategic value. Add long-term perks: infrastructure funding, enhanced security guarantees against Arctic threats, and favorable trade terms for Danish businesses, perhaps tied to Copenhagen’s green energy priorities.

Framing it as a consensual “negotiated transfer” with ongoing Greenlandic autonomy would minimize backlash. As Rubio has emphasized in briefings, mutual economic and security benefits could make refusal politically difficult.

3. Build on Existing Agreements for Incremental Integration

Outright purchase isn’t the only path to strategic goals. The 1951 Defense Agreement already provides expansive US military access, often without Danish veto.

Start by deepening cooperation: expand operations at Pituffik Space Base (formerly Thule), add Arctic monitoring facilities, and increase personnel. Over time, propose a Compact of Free Association, modeled on US arrangements with Pacific nations like the Marshall Islands, granting Greenland substantial autonomy alongside US economic aid and security oversight.

This gradual approach proves American value (countering Russian incursions) without demanding immediate sovereignty transfer, paving the way for fuller integration.

4. Respect International Law and NATO Alliances

Threats of annexation could fracture NATO, given Greenland’s place under Denmark’s defense umbrella. To avoid isolation, the US must prioritize consent and self-determination, in line with UN principles.

Insist on a Greenlandic referendum for legitimacy. Rally allies by underscoring shared Arctic stakes, such as blocking China’s mining inroads. Use private diplomacy for pressure, as Rubio has, while avoiding public ultimatums. Framing acquisition as alliance-strengthening, rather than unilateral, preserves cohesion.

5. Secure Domestic Support and Choose the Right Timing

Any deal requires bipartisan congressional backing, including two-thirds Senate approval for treaties and funding. Emphasize tangible US benefits: resource security for technology supply chains, military advantages, and job creation through investments.

With 2026 midterms approaching, tie the initiative to economic growth. Capitalize on escalating Arctic tensions for urgency, but temper Trump’s personal enthusiasm, viewing it as the “ultimate real estate deal”, with pragmatic messaging to avoid 2019-style dismissal.

In the end, acquiring Greenland requires finesse: irresistible incentives, genuine respect, and patient strategy over blunt force. For Greenlanders, the prize could be unprecedented opportunity and prosperity while preserving their identity. Experts remain skeptical given staunch rejections, but a masterful approach, centered on tangible, life-improving benefits for the island’s people, could secure US Arctic preeminence while delivering a brighter future for its residents. Mishandling it risks alienating allies and empowering rivals.