Trump is right about Greenland — too bad his sales pitch is so wrong

Skip to content

The views expressed by contributors are their own and not the view of The Hill

Like a dog with a bone, there’s no separating President Trump from his obsession with Greenland. And he is pressing his case in typical Trumpian fashion — loud and insulting.

Naturally, his bluster is having the opposite effect of his intent. Even when he has a good case to make, the president’s tactics annoy, alienate and infuriate both friend and foe.

It is likely a carryover from his business career. Trump has always been a brash, aggressive negotiator, emasculating his opponents in public. That worked when he faced off against craven Wall Streeters and spineless bankers who willingly accepted humiliation if there was a payday at the end. But in politics, it doesn’t work that way.

The average politician has no issue incinerating taxpayer dollars, but public humiliation is a disaster and cannot be accepted. Trump either has not figured this out or doesn’t care. Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni should be (and has been) a decent ally for Trump, for instance — she’s certainly better than most European Union leaders. But Trump ignited an idiotic feud for no discernible purpose.

Trump has a real case to make for U.S. control of Greenland. Denmark’s possession of it makes no sense in the modern world. The population is nearly 90 percent Inuit and less than 8 percent Danish. The Inuit are unrelated to Europeans both ethnically and culturally. Despite its parliamentary representation (two seats), it is essentially a welfare colony. And an ersatz colony the Danes could never defend against a putative Russian incursion without American force.

Denmark directly subsidizes Greenland to the tune of $768.5 million per year (as of 2025). At 55,658 in population, that’s about $13,808 per person. Even with that massive subsidy, Greenland has high rates of poverty, substance abuse and healthcare issues. Of course, the Greenlanders are happy with this arrangement. The people of Greenland could not possibly live a modern lifestyle without such subsidies.

By all logic, Denmark should be thrilled that someone — anyone — would offer to take Greenland off their hands. Greenland is a distant, indefensible, icy money pit. But to be fair, the U.S. is not the most logical nation to absorb Greenland.

Canada is.

By all logic, Greenland should be part of Canada. The world’s largest island is an extension of the Arctic Archipelago in the Canadian north. Canada has more than 70,000 Inuit people scattered across the islands and nearby mainland. The Maritime provinces, the closest developed part of Canada, is 1,100 to 1,400 miles from Nuuk, Greenland’s capital, and Ottawa is 1,600 miles away. That’s a lot, but it’s closer than Denmark proper (about 2,000 miles) and Copenhagen (2,200 miles).

Why doesn’t Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney propose either to acquire Greenland or partner with Denmark in a condominium relationship? Simply put, Canada cannot afford it, can’t defend it and doesn’t want it, preferring (in a very Canadian way) rhetoric and cheap gestures.

The last thing Carney wants is to take on more domestic spending obligations. Canada is facing rising deficits and weak economic growth (a 0.7 percent 2026 estimate, versus 2.5 percent for the United States). Maybe picking up part of the welfare tab for Greenland could be done, but if the Inuit peoples across the Canadian Arctic wanted the same subsidy, it would be a budget-buster.

It is difficult to get a full handle on the benefits the Inuit peoples get from Canada, but Greenland’s nearest neighbor is the Inuit-dominated Nunavut (population: 42,215) which is slated to get roughly $227 million Canadian, or $160 million U.S. per year in direct aid. That’s a mere $3,790 per person — more than $10,000 less per person than the Greenlanders get.

If the Inuit get a big raise, would the other First Nations people — for example, the Métis (population: above 600,000) — be willing to watch their neighbors cash in and not get a raise? When the giveaways start, it is hard to stop them.

Carney’s big talk on defense sounds good, but what he leaves out is that Canada has been scrimping on defense for decades (less than 1.3 percent of Canada’s GDP), with its military in such a parlous state the nation simply cannot defend itself without America. Adding Greenland to its responsibilities is impossible today, and may not be possible even if Carney makes good on his ambitions.

In sum, Denmark is determined to hang on to Greenland, a distant, culturally alien land it can’t defend — and pay a huge welfare bill to do it. Canada steadfastly supports the Danish position, despite the fact that geographic and cultural factors dictate Greenland should perhaps be part of Canada. But Canada doesn’t want the defense or welfare obligations. Meanwhile, the Greenlandic peoples want the status quo, since they know full well they cannot live a modern lifestyle without being propped up by a rich, developed nation.

And yet it is Trump who is unreasonable.

The fact is, only the United States can defend Greenland against threats in the Arctic. Furthermore, the U.S. can handle the welfare bill: at $768.5 million, that’s less than two weeks of California welfare fraud. If not full sovereignty, a condominium arrangement would be perfectly sensible.

But a deal is just not possible, given Trump’s tactics. And Trump is not improving his polling in the U.S. pursuing Greenland.

According to the generally Trump-favorable Harris Poll, just 40 percent of American support the acquisition of Greenland — and that’s with a leading question asking if the respondent supports acquiring Greenland in order to “fortify against Russia and China” and “secure trade routes.” A neutral question would likely provide worse results. Trump raising the prospect of military force has practically no support, at just 11 percent overall and a mere 17 percent of Republicans.

When you take the emotion out of the issue and focus on logic, Trump is right about Greenland. But his methods sink any chance of a deal. As a result, Trump is spinning his wheels, getting nowhere while damaging his domestic political support. That is Trump’s illogic.

Keith Naughton, a longtime Republican political consultant, is co-founder of Silent Majority Strategies, a public and regulatory affairs consulting firm, and a former Republican political campaign consultant in Pennsylvania.

Tags

Canada

Denmark

Donald Trump

Greenland

Mark Carney

Copyright 2026 Nexstar Media Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.