The Impact of Greenland's Disputed Land on Global Politics

Western Europe has recently mobilized troops in Greenland, marking its first military engagement in the region in eighty years, amidst rising tensions with the United States. French President Emmanuel Macron stated on January 27, 2026, that the European engagement aims to assert sovereignty, combat foreign interference and climate change, and promote the economic and social progress of Greenland.

However, these assertions are misleading. How can Western Europe advocate for sovereignty in Greenland when the territory is geographically part of North Africa? The claim to combat foreign intervention appears contradictory, as the European nations, including Denmark, asserting rights over Greenland are themselves foreign entities. What could be more foreign than the deployment of troops by France, Germany, Norway, Sweden, Finland, the Netherlands, and the United Kingdom across the Atlantic to Greenland? Furthermore, the rationale linking military presence to combating global warming lacks clarity; can global warming truly be fought with arms? Macron’s suggestion of European interest in Greenland's socio-economic development seems hollow when viewed against the backdrop of ongoing colonial governance.

The reality is that both European and US interests converge on the exploitation of Greenland. This includes control over an estimated 110 billion barrels of oil, one of the world's significant oil reserves. If Europe genuinely aimed to promote Greenland's development, they would facilitate decolonization, allowing the local population the essential right to self- determination as outlined by the United Nations General Assembly's 1960 Declaration on Colonial Independence.

In recalling former President Donald Trump’s controversial comments regarding Greenland, he expressed a possessive sentiment, stating: "The world is not secure unless we have complete and total control of Greenland." This attitude epitomizes a significant source of global insecurity today: the US approach undermines international norms and attempts to impose dominance on other nations, except in the cases of Russia, North Korea, and China.

At the heart of the Greenland situation lies a historical theft and an enduring struggle for sovereignty. The history of Denmark's appropriation of Greenland, coupled with the US’s ambitions to usurp it from Western Europe, suggests a disturbing reality: both parties, long-standing allies since World War II, are prepared to jeopardize global peace.

This fresh conflict depicts a familiar pattern of affluent nations historically seizing lands and altering territorial boundaries worldwide for centuries. This practice, especially pronounced in Africa, has been termed "The Scramble for Africa," driven by insatiable greed, resulting in inevitable conflict. Historically, a conference held in Berlin between 1884 and 1885 witnessed European powers agreeing that wherever one established a foothold, others should likewise seize upon those territories, rationalizing it as colonialism.

Colonialism is akin to the human trafficking practiced during the transatlantic slave trade, which resulted in the forced relocation of over fifteen million individuals over four hundred years.

In the context of Greenland, after Denmark secured control, the US made proposals to purchase the land in 1867 and again in 1910, despite knowing it did not belong to Denmark. The absurdity of the US request echoes earlier attempts to acquire Cuba and Puerto Rico post-war against Spain, highlighting a persistent pattern of entitlement.

It remains a historical disgrace that Denmark engaged in selling territories it had seized wrongfully. For instance, in 1916, it sold the occupied Danish West Indies to the US, which later became known as the United States Virgin Islands, a situation perpetuating colonialism.

Even Greenland is not immune to the antics of Denmark and the US. The latter occupied it during World War II, claiming to prevent Nazi Germany's potential takeover. Yet, decades later, the US maintains a military presence, reducing its bases but still failing to withdraw completely. Meanwhile, in 1953, Denmark effectively annexed Greenland, eschewing independence for the territory.

As Western Europe commenced troop deployments to Greenland from January 14, 2026, President Trump's remarks mocked the European nations as ineffective: “We’ve never needed them. We have never really asked anything of them.” With casualty figures from the Afghan conflict revealing the majority of losses were American, Trump appears to make a valid point, stirring irritation among UK officials who lost troops in the war.

Prince Harry, a veteran of that conflict, retorted that such sacrifices demand acknowledgment and respect, emphasizing the united commitment to diplomacy and peace.

Ultimately, the invasion of Afghanistan by the US and Europe raises questions about their motives and methods. The extensive loss of life, particularly among Afghan civilians, underscores the futility of such actions, which are often framed as promoting peace while simultaneously destabilizing sovereign nations like Iraq and Libya.

My focus does not lie with the rivalries between Europe and its North American counterpart, but rather on how Greenland and the remaining colonies worldwide can achieve independence. There is a pressing need for a reimagined world order.