Denmark Summons US Envoy Over Reports of Influence Operations in Greenland

COPENHAGEN, Denmark — Denmark’s foreign minister has summoned the U.S. ambassador for urgent talks after reports suggested that individuals linked to former President Donald Trump had engaged in covert influence operations in Greenland. The alleged activities, which include attempts to sway local leaders and portray Denmark negatively abroad, have reignited longstanding tensions surrounding the strategic Arctic territory.

Greenland at the Center of Geopolitical Rivalry

Greenland, the world’s largest island, holds vast reserves of rare earth minerals, oil, and gas, while also occupying a critical geopolitical position between North America and Europe. Its location along vital Arctic sea routes makes it a coveted asset for global powers. Although Greenland governs much of its own domestic affairs under home rule, foreign policy and security remain under Denmark’s responsibility.

The report that prompted Denmark’s diplomatic move claims that at least three people connected to Trump were active in Greenland in recent years. Their activities allegedly involved identifying pro-American Greenlanders, compiling lists of local critics who opposed the U.S. interest in the island, and highlighting possible disputes that could be used to weaken Denmark’s standing. Others reportedly sought to cultivate networks with Greenlandic business leaders, community figures, and politicians.

According to Danish officials, such actions, if verified, cross into the realm of “influence operations,” a term used by intelligence agencies to describe organized attempts at shaping opinion and decision-making within another society to achieve strategic goals.

Denmark Demands Answers from Washington

Foreign Minister Lars Løkke Rasmussen expressed his government’s deep concern. “Any attempt to interfere in the Kingdom of Denmark’s internal matters is entirely unacceptable,” Rasmussen said, stressing that Denmark and Greenland’s relationship is built on trust and mutual respect. He confirmed that he had summoned the American envoy to demand clarification on whether Washington had sanctioned such activities.

The U.S. Embassy in Copenhagen has so far declined public comment, leaving questions unanswered about the extent of America’s knowledge or involvement. The lack of response has fueled speculation in both Denmark and Greenland, where leaders are pressing for transparency.

Historical Context: A Longstanding U.S. Interest in Greenland

American interest in Greenland is not new. In 1946, after World War II, the United States offered Denmark $100 million to purchase the island. The offer was rebuffed, but Washington nevertheless secured a significant presence by establishing Thule Air Base, a key site for U.S. missile detection and Arctic operations.

Decades later, in 2019, Trump revived the idea of acquiring Greenland outright, describing it as a “strategic real estate deal.” The proposal was ridiculed internationally, and Denmark’s government rejected it outright, calling Greenland “not for sale.” The episode led to a brief diplomatic spat after Trump canceled a planned visit to Copenhagen when Denmark declined to discuss his idea.

The latest allegations therefore touch a raw nerve: that private individuals or American operatives might still be pursuing a parallel agenda in the territory despite repeated diplomatic rebuffs.

Security Agencies on Alert

Denmark’s domestic intelligence service, PET (Politiets Efterretningstjeneste), warned that Greenland has become a target for foreign influence campaigns. While not naming specific countries, officials noted that operations often seek to exploit disputes between Greenland and Denmark to weaken their political bond.

Greenland’s government, led by Prime Minister Múte Bourup Egede, has also voiced concern in the past that its autonomy makes it a unique arena for great-power rivalry. Its pursuit of greater independence has created an environment where external actors could attempt to sway Greenlandic opinion either toward or away from Copenhagen. Intelligence sources caution that Greenland’s small population of just 56,000 makes its political landscape particularly vulnerable to manipulation by well-funded foreign interests.

Greenland’s Strategic Value and Resource Wealth

Beyond military strategy, Greenland’s natural resources are a major driver of foreign attention. The island is believed to possess one of the largest untapped reserves of rare earth minerals outside China. These minerals, critical for high-tech industries including renewable energy and defense technology, have become central to global competition for energy security.

China has already shown significant interest in Greenland, providing investment in mining projects. This has worried both Denmark and the U.S., as Beijing’s participation could increase Chinese leverage in the Arctic. Washington has previously sought to counter China’s influence by offering economic aid and investment, but reports of covert attempts to steer local politics raise the stakes even further.

Regional Comparisons: Influence Operations in the Arctic

Greenland is not the only Arctic territory subject to outside attention. Across the region, major powers have sought to expand their reach:

• Russia has expanded its military presence in the Arctic by renovating Cold War bases and building new icebreakers.
• China has declared itself a “near-Arctic state” and invested heavily in Icelandic infrastructure, scientific research, and shipping projects.
• Canada has expressed concerns about protecting its sovereignty in the Northern territories in light of increased international interest.

Against this backdrop, any suggestion that private U.S. actors linked to a former president attempted influence operations in Greenland underscores how fragile and contested the Arctic has become.

Economic Impact of Mistrust

If Denmark and the United States cannot resolve the matter diplomatically, Greenland could find itself at the heart of a new strain in NATO relations. The Arctic is already crucial to NATO’s defense posture, and Thule Air Base remains a vital listening post for missile defense systems.

Any perception of American interference risks damaging U.S.-Danish cooperation on defense, trade, and environmental projects in Greenland. For Greenland’s residents, the episode may also reinforce anxieties that the island is being treated as a pawn in a larger geopolitical game rather than as a partner in its own right.

Businesses in mining, fishing, and shipping may feel the repercussions if local confidence in foreign investors declines. Greenland has struggled to balance its desire for economic development with skepticism toward external influence, and renewed concerns about outside manipulation could delay or derail projects that require public trust.

Public Reaction and Calls for Transparency

In both Denmark and Greenland, the alleged influence operations have sparked debate. Danish parliamentarians have urged the government to press Washington firmly for answers, warning against complacency. In Greenland, reactions are mixed: while some argue that closer ties with the United States could bring development opportunities, others warn that political interference undermines Greenland’s democratic institutions.

Social media discussion has highlighted local frustration with being at the center of great-power disputes. Greenlanders often emphasize the importance of being treated as equal partners rather than bargaining chips. Analysts note that the lingering memory of colonial ties between Denmark and Greenland adds sensitivity, making external interference all the more inflammatory.

Looking Ahead: What Comes Next

Much depends on how the United States responds to Denmark’s demand for explanation. If Washington distances itself from the reported activities and reaffirms support for Danish sovereignty, tensions may subside. However, if no clear response is provided, concerns may deepen, especially given Greenland’s long-standing role in U.S. defense strategy.

This diplomatic episode highlights the growing vulnerability of the Arctic region to covert influence campaigns, whether by state actors or private operatives. As the effects of climate change open new Arctic sea routes and accelerate resource exploration, competition over Greenland and neighboring territories is only likely to intensify.

For Denmark, safeguarding Greenland’s political stability has become a matter of both national security and alliance credibility. For Greenland, the controversy presents another reminder of the delicate balance it must navigate as it seeks greater independence while avoiding being pulled too far into the orbit of competing global powers.

In the coming weeks, Copenhagen will be watching closely to see whether Washington provides clarification — and reassurance — that Greenland’s sovereignty will not be undermined by shadowy influence campaigns.