Greenland Prime Minister Jens-Frederik Nielsen told parliament on Monday that the United States continues to seek "paths to ownership and control" of the Arctic island, despite President Donald Trump's recent agreement to rule out military force. Speaking in the capital Nuuk, Nielsen warned lawmakers that "the view upon Greenland and the population has not changed: Greenland is to be tied to the U.S. and governed from there," exposing deep mistrust that persists alongside the diplomatic framework established by NATO just two weeks ago.
The statement comes after the January 22 NATO-U.S. agreement brokered by Secretary General Mark Rutte, which was designed to de-escalate the crisis over Greenland's status. While that deal secured Trump's commitment to abandon military threats and tariffs in exchange for enhanced allied Arctic security commitments, Nielsen's remarks suggest the arrangement has done little to address the fundamental strategic ambition driving Washington's interest in the self-governing Danish territory.
Latest situation update
Nielsen's parliamentary address focused on the psychological toll the sustained pressure campaign has inflicted on Greenlanders. He referenced widespread "severe sleep problems" and "constant uncertainty" among the population, grounding the geopolitical confrontation in human consequences that extend beyond diplomatic cables and alliance frameworks. The Prime Minister's decision to make this statement publicly, rather than through diplomatic channels, signals Nuuk's determination to maintain international visibility on the sovereignty question.
The warning comes despite apparent diplomatic progress. Trump's initial attempts to purchase Greenland, followed by military threats and dismissive comments about Denmark's security capabilities—including his notorious "two dog sleds" remark—had triggered alarm across European capitals. The NATO framework appeared to offer an off-ramp, allowing the U.S. to pursue legitimate Arctic security interests while respecting territorial integrity. Nielsen's assessment suggests that framework has failed to alter Washington's core objectives, only the methods employed to achieve them.
Members are reading: Why the NATO framework may enable rather than constrain U.S. pressure on Greenland
The Greenland Prime Minister's stark assessment reveals the NATO-U.S. framework as a diplomatic holding pattern rather than a durable solution. While Trump has pledged to avoid military action, Nielsen's warning that Washington's control objective persists signals that the crisis has merely entered a new phase—one characterized by institutional ambiguity rather than overt confrontation. For NATO, the challenge ahead is whether the alliance can develop mechanisms to reconcile member state sovereignty with American strategic imperatives, or whether it will simply provide diplomatic cover for outcomes determined by raw power asymmetry.
Subscribe to our free newsletter to unlock direct links to all sources used in this article.
We believe you deserve to verify everything we write. That's why we meticulously document every source.
