Trump's envoy claims a secret deal from 1941 will give US 'total, unfettered access' to Greenland – We Got This Covered
Forgot password
Enter the email address you used when you joined and we'll send you instructions to reset your password.
If you used Apple or Google to create your account, this process will create a password for your existing account.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Reset password instructions sent. If you have an account with us, you will receive an email within a few minutes.
Something went wrong. Try again or contact support if the problem persists.
Photo by Sean Gallup/Getty Images

Trump’s envoy claims a secret deal from 1941 will give US ‘total, unfettered access’ to Greenland

Ancient policies are being applied to a modern world.

President Trump is expecting the United States to gain “total, unfettered access” to Greenland, a claim made by the administration’s dedicated envoy for the island, Jeff Landry. The Louisiana governor, whom President Trump appointed as the official envoy for the Arctic territory, says that a secret framework deal has already been established. 

Recommended Videos

Landry explained that this framework is built directly upon defense agreements the U.S. and Denmark struck way back in 1941 and 1951. While he couldn’t share the specifics because the details are still being hammered out, Landry insists the deal will seriously boost security for the U.S., NATO, and Greenland itself, reaffirming long-standing defense obligations across the Atlantic.

This revelation comes after months of soaring tension between the US and NATO. Newsweek reported that, after failed military threats, the President claimed that a deal is in the works, even dropping his threats about placing more tariffs on European supporters. This is the framework Landry is now detailing, and President Trump is reportedly calling it the “ultimate long-term deal,” that “puts everybody in a really good position, especially as it pertains to security and to minerals.”

The Greenland situation has just been a lot of bluster

The U.S. has been so focused on Greenland for its strategic position. Its military presence at the Pituffik Space Base is absolutely vital for picking up missile launches directed toward the U.S. mainland, monitoring space, and tracking submarines.

Landry says this new framework will dramatically broaden America’s “operational freedom” and support more U.S. infrastructure and bases on the island. Crucially, it will also support Washington’s ambitious and extremely expensive Golden Dome missile defense shield, designed to protect the U.S. from advanced threats like hypersonic missiles.

The administration is also justifying this push by claiming the framework will fend off “hostile Chinese and Russian influence” in the Arctic. President Trump told reporters earlier this month, “The problem is, there’s not a thing that Denmark can do about it if Russia or China wants to occupy Greenland, but there’s everything we can do.” Danish officials have pushed back on that claim, insisting they are rapidly investing in Greenlandic defenses.

Landry wrote that Greenland “fits squarely within the ‘Donroe doctrine,’ a foreign policy strategy inspired by President James Monroe from the 1800s. Monroe saw European countries as having no business in Latin American affairs, cementing the U.S. as the dominant power. 

Now, the administration seeks to assert American influence over the Western Hemisphere, demanding “unfettered and uninterrupted access to key strategic territories in the Western Hemisphere,” including Greenland and the Panama Canal. Even if it is at the cost of allies and public opinion around the world. 


We Got This Covered is supported by our audience. When you purchase through links on our site, we may earn a small affiliate commission. Learn more about our Affiliate Policy
Author
Image of Jaymie Vaz
Jaymie Vaz
Jaymie Vaz is a freelance writer who likes to use words to explore all the things that fascinate her. You can usually find her doing unnecessarily deep dives into games, movies, or fantasy/Sci-fi novels. Or having rousing debates about how political and technological developments are causing cultural shifts around the world.