The prospect of the United States acquiring Greenland has recently gained heightened attention as the White House publicly acknowledged the possibility of using military force to secure the Danish territory. President Donald Trump has elevated the Greenland acquisition to a matter of national security, with his administration evaluating multiple strategies including the deployment of military resources.
White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt confirmed on Tuesday that President Trump perceives Greenland as strategically significant. According to Leavitt, the President and his advisors are actively examining different courses of action, and military involvement remains “always an option,” as reported by Reuters. This statement underscores the administration's emphasis on securing the Arctic region due to its geopolitical importance.
In contrast, Secretary of State Marco Rubio has reportedly sought to temper the narrative by briefing congressional members in a confidential session. Rubio conveyed that President Trump intends to acquire Greenland through diplomatic means rather than military intervention, suggesting a preference for a peaceful transaction between the U.S. and Denmark, the island’s sovereign nation, according to a report from The Wall Street Journal.
The tension surrounding this issue has provoked responses from political figures within the United States. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) expressed serious concerns regarding the President's remarks on assuming control over Greenland. Speaking to NewsNation on Tuesday, Jeffries highlighted that President Trump’s prior conduct warrants taking such announcements gravely, implying that lawmakers must remain vigilant about the administration’s declared foreign policy ambitions.
The diplomatic sensitivity of the Greenland question extends beyond U.S. internal politics to affect global alliances, particularly NATO. Denmark’s Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen issued a firm warning that any military attempt by the United States to seize Greenland would threaten the alliance’s cohesion and survival. Her statement responded directly to renewed assertions by President Trump concerning his desire to dominate the Arctic region, particularly following the capture of Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro.
Prime Minister Frederiksen emphasized that the sovereignty of Greenland is intrinsic to the Danish Kingdom and, by extension, NATO’s collective defense framework. She called upon President Trump to desist from threats of annexing Greenland, affirming that such action is unwarranted and would constitute a breach of alliance trust and mutual defense commitments.
In conjunction with these warnings, recent developments have included approval by the U.S. State Department of a potential $951 million arms sale to Denmark. This package includes advanced weapons and equipment designed to enhance Denmark's capacity to counter emerging threats, particularly through modern air-to-air and surface-to-air missile systems. This measure reflects ongoing defense cooperation between the U.S. and Denmark amidst the political uncertainty regarding Greenland.
Interest in the possibility of U.S. control over parts of Greenland has surged among market participants. On the prediction platform Kalshi, the likelihood of the U.S. assuming control rose to 40% as of Wednesday, following a weekend peak above 46%. This fluctuation indicates market sensitivity to geopolitical news and reflects the volatile nature of this political discourse.
Amid the geopolitical debates, economist Peter Schiff has articulated concern about the broader implications of President Trump’s foreign policy language. Schiff warned that such rhetoric potentially accelerates the nation’s sovereign debt accumulation and contributes to currency instability. Highlighting these risks, the U.S. Dollar Index (DXY) declined by 9.7% in 2025, coinciding with the U.S. federal debt surpassing $38 trillion amid government shutdowns. This rapid increase in debt represents the fastest expansion rate since the COVID-19 pandemic began, underscoring fiscal pressures that could be exacerbated by geopolitical confrontations.
Given the complex interplay of national security interests, diplomatic strategy, alliance dynamics, and economic ramifications, the situation regarding Greenland's potential acquisition remains fluid. The U.S. administration's openness to multiple approaches, including military options, alongside efforts to maintain diplomatic channels, reflects the gravity and complexity of this issue on the international stage.