Will Greenland Be Trump’s Alaska?

When Secretary of State William Seward purchased Alaska from Russia for about two cents per acre in 1867, critics mocked what would become the 49th state as “Seward’s Folly.” But Seward would ultimately be vindicated as the Last Frontier proved rich in natural resources and has become a crucial strategic outpost for U.S. military interests.

History may now be repeating itself in Greenland. When President Donald Trump announced his ambition to expand the U.S. presence on the world’s largest island and perhaps even “buy” it from Denmark, the media and Democrats lambasted it it as a fool’s errand and a total waste of resources. But China and Russia’s growing presence in the Arctic have made Greenland some of the most important territory in the world from a defense perspective. Meanwhile, oil, gas, and mineral exploration could be an enormous financial boon for the United States.

Trump revived that economic argument earlier this month, announcing on Truth Social that “massive Oil, Gas, and Mineral Exploration is getting ready to begin in our new and beautiful Greenland.”

“There are Experts that are saying that the amount of easily available Oil is far greater than that of almost any land, anywhere in the World,” Trump continued. “Any future attack on the United States will have to come across Greenland, where our Defense will routinely knock down drones, missiles, or any other form of weapon not yet even conceived.”

That announcement follows a landmark Arctic security agreement negotiated by the Trump administration and signed with Denmark’s and Greenland’s leaders on September 22. It permits expansion at Pituffik Space Base, creates additional defense areas, and establishes extensive military access and overflight rights. Non-NATO countries also cannot establish military installations or a persistent military presence without all three parties’ agreement.

The Greenland agreement bears all the hallmarks of Trump’s “art of the deal” approach. Following an extraordinary opening demand, Trump secured a consequential agreement viewed as a win-win by both parties. The result strengthens America’s position in the arctic, a region U.S. adversaries are determined to control.

“The agreement came at a time when such action was more vital than ever,” said a former high-ranking Soviet Navy officer who defected to the West in the mid-1990s and requested anonymity. “Moscow and Beijing have rebuilt their muscle with plans to show it to the world.”

Greenland’s importance stretches back to the Cold War, when the Greenland-Iceland-United Kingdom gap was a critical passage connecting Soviet naval forces with the North Atlantic. Monitoring submarines moving through those waters helped protect NATO’s transatlantic lifeline.

Pituffik, formerly Thule Air Base, remains essential to missile warning, missile defense, and space surveillance. Its northern position gives American defenses a vantage point over potential approaches to North America.

The island also figures in Chinese military planning. “In 1991, CCP leaders ordered the PLA to develop plans based on Soviet strategy, which included Greenland,” said a former high-ranking PLA officer involved in war planning at the time.

Today, Russia is investing in new Arctic military infrastructure and refurbishing Soviet-era installations. Its Northern Fleet and submarine-launched nuclear forces operate from the Kola Peninsula. The Pentagon’s Arctic strategy identifies Russia as possessing the region’s most developed military presence.

China, meanwhile, has made its intentions public, with Beijing’s 2018 Arctic policy describing China as a “Near-Arctic State” and proposing a “Polar Silk Road,” extending its trade and infrastructure ambitions northward.

The commercial attraction is substantial. The Northern Sea Route along Russia’s coast can shorten voyages between Asia and Europe, although ice, seasonal conditions, and operating costs constrain its usefulness.

Beijing has also invested directly in Russia’s Arctic economy. China National Petroleum Corporation recently acquired a 20 percent stake in Yamal LNG, which shipped its first cargo in 2017. China’s Silk Road Fund held another 9.9 percent of the company. Russia offers Beijing access, while Chinese capital helps Moscow develop the region.

China’s ambitions extend beyond Russia. Canada blocked Shandong Gold’s proposed acquisition of Arctic miner TMAC Resources in 2020 following a national security review. Such bids show Beijing’s interest in establishing durable commercial footholds across the north. But that civilian activity can also have strategic military applications.

“The CCP makes no distinction between peaceful and non-peaceful goals; to them, everything is a form of warfare,” said Professor Kuang Yǔháng, a former Politburo advisor. “Each vessel is equipped with data-collection equipment from deep-sea cables, satellites, radio waves, and shores wherever it can find, and each vessel is armed, now, at least with drones,” added PLA defector Lt. Col. Quán Chāngpǔ.

The disparity in icebreaking capacity is striking. Russia operates more than 40 icebreakers. Congressional testimony records China commissioning its fifth in 2025. The U.S. Coast Guard, meanwhile, operates just three polar icebreakers. This limited fleet constrains sustained access, resupply, and operations in ice-covered waters. The Coast Guard has completed contract awards for 11 Arctic Security Cutters, but building them will take time.

Military cooperation between Moscow and Beijing is already visible. In July 2024, NORAD intercepted two Russian Tu-95 and two Chinese H-6 aircraft operating together in Alaska’s air defense identification zone. They remained in international airspace but demonstrated their ability to coordinate near American territory.

Trump’s response also belongs to a longer American tradition. Postwar records show U.S. military leaders favored buying Greenland or obtaining long-term base rights. Under Reagan, Washington defended radar modernization at Thule against Soviet objections under the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty.

September’s agreement advances that enduring objective of securing reliable access to territory critical to American defense.

Greenland’s political future remains for Greenlanders to determine, and its economic potential requires investment and workable development agreements. But expanded American access and limits on rival military deployments already carry strategic value.

Seward’s achievement took decades to earn its full appreciation. Trump’s Greenland initiative may follow a similar path – mocked for its ambition, then celebrated for strengthening America’s position in the world.