Trump’s quest to acquire Greenland: Is it even possible, and how would it work? 

For Donald Trump, Greenland is the ultimate real estate trophy. He has repeatedly insisted he absolutely must buy it for…”national security.”

And because no Trump endeavor is complete without a dose of cringe-worthy theatrics, his son, Don Jr., recently made a pit stop in Greenland. Sporting a red MAGA hat, he triumphantly declared, “Greenland loves America and Trump.” Sure, Don. That’s why Greenland’s government politely told your dad to take his imperialist dreams elsewhere.

Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen famously called Trump’s proposal “absurd,” adding that Greenland is “not for sale.” Greenland’s Prime Minister, Múte Bourup Egede, has been even more direct, declaring, “We don’t want to be Americans. We want to be Greenlanders.” So unless Trump is planning to resurrect the colonial playbook and forcefully annex Greenland, this entire idea is dead on arrival.

So, can the U.S. actually acquire Greenland?

Greenland is self-governing territory under the Kingdom of Denmark, with a robust local government, a distinct Inuit-majority population, and a rich culture and history stretching back thousands of years. Historically inhabited by indigenous Inuit communities who migrated from Arctic Canada, Greenland was formally colonized by Denmark in the early 18th century. It obtained home rule in 1979 and expanded autonomy in 2009, giving its people substantial control over internal affairs. Today, Greenlanders are increasingly vocal about their future.

Legally speaking, acquiring Greenland would not be so simple. Historically, territories have changed hands via purchase — think the U.S. buying Alaska from Russia in 1867 or the Louisiana Purchase from France in 1803. But these transactions occurred in vastly different historical contexts — colonial mindsets and imperial ambitions that international law now unequivocally condemns. Today, international law explicitly values self-determination, democracy, and human rights.

Under international law, acquisitions of territory today must adhere to the principle of self-determination enshrined in the United Nations Charter (Chapter I, Article 1). This means that Greenlanders themselves — not Donald Trump, not Denmark, and certainly not Buddy Carter — have the ultimate legal and moral authority to determine Greenland’s political future. Any serious attempt to transfer sovereignty would require consent from both Greenland’s parliament (Inatsisartut) and the Danish government.

Moreover, Greenland a strategically vital member of NATO territory, protected by Article 5 — the alliance’s famed “all-for-one” collective defense clause. Simply put, any forced attempt by Trump to “take Greenland one way or the other,” as he’s brazenly threatened in his latest Congressional address, would amount to an attack on Denmark itself. This would immediately trigger NATO’s mutual defense obligations, dragging the United States (ironically) into conflict with its closest allies. NATO allies have reportedly been holding secret talks about how to respond should the president actually try to seize Greenland. Germany is floating the idea of deploying NATO troops to Greenland. As one NATO diplomat famously remarked, “It’s a moral compass without a needle.” 

The European Union, too, isn’t standing idle. General Robert Brieger openly suggested stationing EU troops in Greenland to “send a strong signal.” Meanwhile, back in Greenland itself, the reaction has been far more serious. Greenlanders are now preparing for a March 11 general election, in which independence is likely to dominate the political discourse.