Greenland Not for Sale? Maybe It Should Be

What Happened

Back in 2019 when President Trump floated the idea of buying Greenland during his first term, he was mocked incessantly by the media. European leaders, including Denmark, scoffed. Trump himself joked about the idea.

But behind the jokes was a serious point: Greenland was more than a thinly populated frozen wasteland. It is one of the most resource-rich and strategically vital places on Earth. If the United States wants to stay ahead of China and Russia in the Arctic and on the global economic stage, revisiting the 'crazy' idea is more practical than many think.

Although Greenland is technically a part of the Kingdom of Denmark, it does have increasing autonomy. The U.S. already has a military presence there with Thule Air Base, but it's not enough anymore.

The Arctic has been heating up for years — literally and geopolitically. Russia has been beefing up its military presence in the north and China is eyeing rare earth deposits. The United States can no longer afford to sit idle.

Why It Matters

Let's talk numbers. In 1946, President Truman offered to buy Greenland for $100 million in gold, which would be roughly $1.5 billion today. A Financial Times breakdown in 2019 put the island’s total potential value at $1.1 trillion. This value is driven by rare earth minerals, oil, natural gas, and real estate.

Some of the world's largest deposits of rare earth materials, which are used in everything from fighter jets to smartphones, sit underneath Greenland's tundra and ice. The Amitsoq graphite deposit is among the richest in the world.

Offshore, the U.S. Geological Survey estimates up to 50 billion barrels of oil and gas may lie beneath the seabed. If even a small fraction becomes extractable, it could generate tens of billions annually.

But extracting these materials would require serious infrastructure, which the island lacks. For perspective, Greenland is the world's largest island, covering approximately 836,330 square miles (2,166,086 square kilometers).

Despite its immense size, due to its harsh terrain and thin population, there are no roads connecting its towns and settlements. The total length of its roads is only about 93 miles (150 kilometers), of which only around 56 miles (90 kilometers) is paved.

Building infrastructure won't be cheap. Between purchase prices, infrastructure, and ongoing operations support, costs would likely exceed $1 trillion over time, which is nothing to shake a stick at. But compared to what we spend each year on foreign aid, bloated bureaucracy, and interest on national debt, the number doesn't seem so high.

In fiscal year 2024, the U.S. spent about $21.7 billion on foreign aid through USAID — just 0.3% of the federal budget. Meanwhile, interest payments on the national debt soared to over $1.12 trillion. Spending on federal bureaucracy is harder to pin down, but the government employs over 2 million civilian workers across agencies, with administrative costs running into the hundreds of billions annually.

A conservative estimate suggests that after the infrastructure is built and fully operational, the U.S. could see annual returns running between $50-100 billion from mineral wealth, energy, and Arctic trade routes. This doesn’t even account for the strategic value of annexing the island. This would give the U.S. control over key northern shipping lanes, prime military positioning against Russia, and leverage over critical supply chains that are currently being dominated by China.

How It Affects You

If you care about American energy independence, national security, and reducing our reliance on China, Greenland matters. Annexation — or even a long-term strategic partnership — would give the U.S. direct access to resources we desperately need. It would also block China and Russia from exploiting one of the last undeveloped frontiers.

Greenlanders have a say in this as well, as they should. However, the island relies heavily on subsidies from Denmark. With the right approach — respect, investment, and opportunity — they may find alignment with American values and prosperity more appealing than European dependency.