Why the Arctic’s quiet giant has returned to the centre of global politics
At first glance, the arrival of a small contingent of French soldiers in Nuuk might seem like a footnote in the daily churn of international news. A handful of troops, a distant capital, a frozen island at the edge of most maps. And yet, in the Arctic, symbols matter. Greenland—Greenland, or Kalaallit Nunaat in its own language—has once again become a place where global anxieties crystallise.
For readers of All Things Nordic, this is not just a story about military deployments or diplomatic tension. It is about how the North, long perceived as peripheral, is quietly becoming central to the 21st-century world order.
France’s signal, Europe’s hesitation
Paris describes its presence as limited, defensive, and European in spirit. President Emmanuel Macron has framed the mission as an assertion of shared responsibility in the Arctic rather than a challenge to anyone’s sovereignty. The troops—mountain specialists and Alpine hunters—are there to endure, observe, and signal attention. But Europe’s posture remains hesitant. Beyond France, contributions are symbolic at best, revealing an unresolved tension within the continent: how to show strategic awareness in the Arctic without openly confronting the United States, still the dominant military actor in the region. Washington, for its part, has reacted with calm indifference.
The American obsession with Greenland
President Donald Trump has once again spoken openly about the need for the United States to control Greenland for national security reasons. Meetings in Washington involving Vice President J. D. Vance and Secretary of State Marco Rubio failed to soften this position. The message is blunt: Denmark, in Trump’s view, cannot be fully trusted to protect the island from Russian and Chinese influence. To European ears, this rhetoric sounds provocative, even surreal. Yet within U.S. strategic circles, Greenland is anything but a fantasy. Its geography alone explains the fixation.
The Arctic chessboard: Russia and China
From Moscow, the reaction has been sharp. Russia has accused NATO of accelerating the militarisation of the Arctic, warning that allied movements in the far north risk destabilising an already fragile balance. For the Kremlin, the Arctic is both shield and resource frontier—too important to ignore, too exposed to leave uncontested. Meanwhile, China plays a quieter, longer game. Beijing officially supports Danish sovereignty over Greenland, but for years it has cultivated the idea of a “Polar Silk Road”: Arctic shipping lanes that could bypass congested southern routes and bring Asia closer to the Atlantic. Rare earths, uranium, hydrocarbons—Greenland’s subsoil holds materials vital to modern technologies and energy transitions. The ice is melting, and with it, old certainties.
A Nordic island shaped by outsiders
Greenland’s history is a reminder that the Arctic has never been as isolated as it appears. Norse settlers arrived over a thousand years ago, Inuit cultures followed from the Canadian Arctic, and Denmark gradually asserted colonial control from the early modern period onward. In the 20th century, the island became a strategic outpost for the United States, especially during the Cold War, when the base at Thule—today Pituffik—anchored American surveillance and deterrence in the High North. Autonomy came slowly. Home rule in 1979, expanded self-government in 2008, and an ongoing debate about independence have reshaped Greenland’s relationship with Copenhagen. Yet autonomy has not meant invisibility. On the contrary, it has coincided with renewed global attention.
What Greenlanders want
Recent elections have shown a population cautious rather than revolutionary. Most Greenlanders do not seek annexation by the United States, nor a rushed break from Denmark. The prevailing mood favours economic development, broader international partnerships, and respect for local decision-making. And yet, cultural gravity matters. North America feels closer than Brussels. Economic ties, security structures, and even sports affiliations increasingly pull Greenland westward. In 2025, the Pentagon’s decision to place Greenland under U.S. Northern Command rather than a European framework reinforced that perception.
The GIUK gap: geography as destiny
At the heart of U.S. concern lies a cold, technical acronym: the GIUK gap—the stretch of ocean between Greenland, Iceland, and the United Kingdom. For decades, it has been seen as a strategic choke point, controlling access between the Arctic and the North Atlantic. Any hostile presence there, especially one linked to China, would be unacceptable in Washington. Seen from this angle, Trump’s language appears less eccentric and more brutally consistent. Greenland is not an island at the edge of the world; it is a hinge between oceans, continents, and power blocs.
The Nordic North, no longer peripheral
For Denmark, the challenge is existential. Copenhagen is investing heavily in Greenlandic infrastructure, healthcare, airports, and ports, partly to answer local needs, partly to reassure Washington that Chinese influence is being contained. It is a delicate balancing act between alliance loyalty, colonial history, and respect for Greenlandic autonomy. For Europe, Greenland is a mirror. It reflects the continent’s difficulty in acting strategically in the Arctic without either overreaching or disappearing altogether.
Ice, memory, and the future
The Arctic has always inspired extreme visions—from apocalyptic literature to imperial dreams. Today, the danger is less mythical but more complex. Climate change is opening routes, exposing resources, and inviting competition. Greenland stands at the centre of this transformation, not as a prize to be claimed, but as a society navigating pressures far larger than itself.
For All Things Nordic, this is the story that matters: the North not as a postcard, but as a living, contested space where history, identity, and geopolitics collide. The ice is retreating. Attention is advancing. And Greenland, quietly, is becoming one of the places where the future will be decided.
Read more on Defensenews.com, Euronews.com, Reuters.com
