By Don Terry, Ben Emos & Andrew James | Wednesday January 21, 2026 | 4 min read
Donald Trump has never been subtle about his ambitions, but his renewed fixation on Greenland feels especially surreal. The island—vast, icy, and sparsely populated—has once again become the object of presidential desire. One official says Trump wants to buy it outright. Another suggests the United States could simply take it. Just days ago, Trump declared, “We need Greenland from the standpoint of national security,” as if the matter were self-evident.
It isn’t.
Even setting aside the jaw-dropping $700 billion figure that has been floated in internal discussions, the idea collapses under the weight of law, politics, and reality. Greenland and Denmark, for all the noise, can rest easy. Congress would never approve such a purchase, and there is little reason—strategic or otherwise—that the United States would need to make one.
The irony is that America already has much of what Trump claims to want.
Under a little-known but still very much active Cold War–era agreement signed in 1951, the United States enjoys extraordinary military access to Greenland. The deal, negotiated with Denmark at the height of tensions with the Soviet Union, gives Washington broad rights to operate on the island. Today, the U.S. maintains one base—Pituffik Space Base, formerly Thule Air Base—in a remote corner of northwestern Greenland. But the agreement goes much further.
It allows the United States to construct, maintain, and operate military installations across Greenland. It permits the housing of personnel and grants control over landings, takeoffs, anchorage, and the movement of ships and aircraft. In practical terms, this means the U.S. already has a free hand to protect its strategic interests in the Arctic.
As Mikkel Runge Olesen, a researcher at the Danish Institute for International Studies, has put it bluntly: “The U.S. has such a free hand in Greenland that it can pretty much do what it wants.” His conclusion is even more telling. He struggles to see what Washington couldn’t get—“if it just asked nicely.”
That last part matters.
Buying Greenland is not just unnecessary; it is fundamentally disconnected from how the world actually works. Greenland does not want to be bought by anyone, least of all the United States. It is an autonomous territory with its own government and a growing sense of national identity. Denmark, meanwhile, does not have the legal authority to sell it even if it wanted to. Any attempt to treat Greenland as a real estate deal ignores both democratic reality and international law.
Then there is Congress.
No U.S. president—Trump included—can spend $700 billion on a territorial acquisition without congressional approval. The Constitution is explicit: Congress controls federal spending. A purchase of this magnitude would require legislation, hearings, votes, and almost certainly a treaty ratified by the Senate. In today’s political climate, the odds of lawmakers signing off on such an extravagant and controversial deal are close to zero.
That is why Trump’s Greenland rhetoric feels less like a serious policy proposal and more like a familiar pattern: bold declarations untethered from legal or political feasibility. It plays well to an image of strength and dominance, but it dissolves quickly when confronted with institutional reality.
Mein Kampf & Trump Now On AMAZON
There is also a deeper contradiction at play. Trump frames Greenland as a national security necessity, yet the United States already enjoys unparalleled military privileges there. What he is really seeking may not be access or security, but ownership—the symbolism of possession, the headline-grabbing audacity of the claim.
But geopolitics is not branding, and alliances are not property deals.
If the United States wants more cooperation in the Arctic, it already has the tools to pursue it: diplomacy, treaties, and partnerships built on consent rather than compulsion. The legal framework exists. The strategic access exists. What is missing is not leverage, but restraint.
So yes, Greenland and Denmark can breathe easier than the rhetoric suggests. Congress won’t approve a $700 billion purchase, Greenland isn’t for sale, and the United States doesn’t need to own the island to protect its interests. Sometimes, asking nicely really is enough—and sometimes, it’s the only thing that works.