Listen to the article
National security experts reject President Donald Trump’s claim that U.S. control of Greenland is critical for the Golden Dome missile defense initiative, and say it ignores longstanding diplomatic agreements that would likely already permit the project’s expansion on the Danish-controlled island.
Trump, in a social media post Wednesday morning, wrote that United States control of Greenland “is vital for the Golden Dome that we are building,” a reference to his administration’s ambition multi-hundred-billion dollar space- and ground-based defense shield initiative. Experts say that Trump’s statement, made ahead of an unproductive diplomatic meeting between the two nations Wednesday in Washington, ignores the U.S. military’s existing, and crucial, presence on the island at Pituffik Space Base.
“What he is saying is detached from reality,” said Todd Harrison, a defense and space policy expert with the American Enterprise Institute. “It’s like he doesn’t realize that for decades we’ve had a major base in Greenland that is critical to homeland missile defense and space surveillance.”
The U.S. military has had a presence in Greenland since 1951, following an agreement between Denmark and the U.S. government that established the Thule Defense Area. The current base, renamed Pituffik Space Base in 2023, is focused on missile warning, space surveillance, and satellite command and control missions.
Under the decades-old agreement, the U.S. government has the right to “to improve and generally to fit the area for military use,” “to construct, install, maintain, and operate facilities and equipment,” and “provide for the protection and internal security of the area.”
The Danish government and U.S. government would have to negotiate such an expansion under the existing agreement, said Mikkel Runge Olesen, a senior researcher at the Danish Institute for International Studies in Copenhagen. Historically, the U.S. had no issues securing its national security priorities.
“That means that de facto, it has been a very, very wide agreement in terms of allowing for the U.S. to take care of its security needs,” Olesen told Defense One on Wednesday, adding that any future Greenland-related Golden Dome initiatives would more than likely be accepted.
“A U.S. request concerning a key security issue for them would almost certainly be considered very favorable,” he said.
In 2004, Denmark, Greenland, and the U.S. signed cooperation agreements which allowed for missile defense radar upgrades. Currently, there are no U.S. missile-defense interceptors in Greenland. But the island has long been recognized as a strategic necessity due to its location on the ocean pathway and naval chokepoint known as the Greenland-Iceland-United Kingdom Gap, and key arctic proximity for detecting oncoming missiles from Eurasia.
The Trump administration’s ongoing pursuit of Greenland, and criticism of the Danish government, has put the territory’s residents and Pituffik Space Base leaders in the spotlight.
After Vice President JD Vance visited the base in March, the installation commander sent out an email seeking to distance the installation from Vance’s remarks. A day after the Space Force officer’s email was made public, she was fired from her job overseeing Pituffik.
A new Quinnipiac University poll released Wednesday showed that 86 percent of respondents oppose a U.S. military takeover of Greenland. And 55 percent of participants oppose the U.S. government purchasing the territory. In a poll conducted last year, 85 percent of Greenlanders surveyed were against the territory becoming part of the U.S.
Read the full article here
14 Comments
It’s concerning that Trump’s statement ignores the longstanding diplomatic agreements and cooperation between the US and Denmark – what does this say about the administration’s approach to international relations and diplomacy?
The fact that the US government has the right to ‘improve and generally to fit the area for military use’ under the existing agreement suggests that there may be more room for negotiation and cooperation with Denmark rather than outright control.
This could be a more diplomatic and less controversial approach, but would it achieve the same level of security and strategic advantage that the US is seeking?
Todd Harrison’s statement that Trump’s claim is ‘detached from reality’ resonates, especially considering the Pituffik Space Base’s critical role in homeland missile defense and space surveillance, which has been in operation for decades.
The fact that the US has had a presence in Greenland since 1951, with the Thule Defense Area agreement, makes Trump’s claim of needing to control the island for the Golden Dome initiative seem misleading, as the existing agreement already allows for military use and expansion.
Exactly, and it’s not like the Danish government has ever denied the US requests for security-related expansions in the past, so what’s the real motive behind Trump’s push for control?
The strategic location of Greenland, with its proximity to the Greenland-Iceland-United Kingdom Gap, is indeed a key factor in detecting oncoming missiles from Eurasia, but does this necessarily mean the US needs to control the entire island?
Not necessarily, but having a stronger presence could enhance the US’s ability to respond to potential threats, although it’s a delicate balance with diplomatic relations.
I’m skeptical about the true motives behind Trump’s push for US control of Greenland – is it purely a national security concern or are there other factors at play, such as economic or political interests?
It’s worth noting that there are currently no US missile-defense interceptors in Greenland, despite the island’s strategic importance – is this a gap in the US’s defense strategy that the Golden Dome initiative aims to address?
I’m curious to know more about the 2004 cooperation agreements between Denmark, Greenland, and the US that allowed for missile defense radar upgrades – does this set a precedent for future Golden Dome initiatives?
Mikkel Runge Olesen’s point that any future Greenland-related Golden Dome initiatives would ‘more than likely be accepted’ due to the existing agreement and historical cooperation is reassuring, but what are the potential risks or downsides to such an expansion?
The Golden Dome initiative’s multi-hundred-billion dollar price tag is staggering – how does the potential benefit of controlling Greenland fit into the overall cost-benefit analysis of this project?
The Trump administration’s pursuit of Greenland and criticism of the Danish government has put the territory’s residents and Pituffik Space Base leaders in the spotlight – what are the potential consequences for these groups if the US were to gain control of the island?