As the sun rises over the ice-covered mountains of Nuuk fjord, Greenland, one of the world’s last wild frontiers, finds itself at the center of international debates about sovereignty and independence. Following remarks from U.S. President-elect Donald Trump, in which he refused to rule out taking Greenland by force, residents across the island are voicing their opposition.
On December 16, Trump made waves with his controversial statement regarding Greenland’s status, prompting a wave of discontent among locals. “Greenland belongs to Greenlanders,” says a local fisherman, whose words echo a sentiment voiced throughout the island. “Trump can visit, but that’s it.”
Greenland, a semi-autonomous territory of Denmark, has long been a place of strong local identity, and residents like Kaaleeraq Ringsted, a 73-year-old church elder, have expressed outrage at the idea of selling or ceding the island. “Greenland is not for sale,” Ringsted states, recalling how he learned to fish and hunt with his father and grandfather. He, like many others, wants to preserve the land and its ways of life for future generations.
Further emphasizing local sentiment, Angutimmarik Hansen, a sheep farmer, dismisses the idea of selling Greenland to the U.S. as “stupid.” Although he acknowledges the island’s economic challenges, he insists, “We can work with the people of the USA, but not at the expense of our sovereignty.”
Despite these objections, the U.S. is still an influential presence in Greenland, and political figures like Jørgen Boassen, a businessman and supporter of Trump, suggest there is potential for economic collaboration with the U.S. “They are welcome to come and see what our country is like,” he says.
In Nuuk, Greenland’s capital and the world’s northernmost capital city, the conversation has shifted from rejection to reflection. Local leaders like Kuno Fencker, a member of Greenland’s parliament, argue that Greenland must be able to negotiate directly with the U.S. on matters like defense, security, and economic development, rather than through Denmark. Fencker believes that a sovereign Greenland could benefit from international cooperation, though he recognizes the island would need financial support, especially from the U.S. and Denmark.
However, the push for independence is not without its complexities. Greenland receives significant subsidies from Denmark, and any move toward full independence could come with economic challenges. “We are not naïve,” says Fencker, acknowledging the potential costs but emphasizing the importance of self-determination.
At the same time, Greenlanders are still grappling with the legacy of colonialism and injustices committed during Danish rule. Memories of forced sterilizations of Inuit women in the 1960s and 70s remain a painful chapter in the island’s history.
Greenland’s Prime Minister, Mute Egede, has stated, “We do not want to be Danish, we do not want to be American, we want to be Greenlandic,” underscoring the island’s desire for autonomy. Meanwhile, Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen has tread carefully, acknowledging the feelings stirred by Trump’s remarks but also highlighting Greenland’s ongoing relationship with Denmark.
The debate about Greenland’s future is far from over. As the island’s residents continue to navigate complex issues of independence and self-determination, Trump’s rhetoric has thrust the conversation into the global spotlight. Yet, the message from Greenland is clear: its destiny will be determined by the voices of its people, not foreign powers.
