Name: Trump eyes the Arctic: Will Europe defend Greenland? | To the Point
Uploaded: 2026-01-15T17:15:21.000Z
Duration: 26 min 7 s
Description: Thousands of YouTube videos with English-Chinese subtitles! Now you can learn to understand native speakers, expand your vocabulary, and improve your pronunciation...

The US President has set his sights on the world's largest island, Greenland.

The island governs itself, but it's part of the Kingdom of Denmark, a member of both NATO and the European Union.

And that's why tensions around this icy territory are suddenly running high.

Greenland is rich in natural resources and strategically vital, often called the gateway to the Arctic.

The president says the United States should buy the island or, if necessary, take it.

He argues it's essential for America's security and even for the strength of NATO.

We've seen frantic shuttle diplomacy to Washington.

So what happens next, and how does this end?

And while all this unfolds, are Russia and China preparing for their own fight over Arctic dominance?

On to the Point, we ask, Trump eyes the Arctic.

Michael Paul is a security expert and Arctic specialist.

He is a senior fellow at the German Institute for International and Security Affairs.

Anja Velasque is the international editor of Berlin's daily Tagesspiegel and member of its editorial board.

During the first Trump administrations, she worked for the German government in Washington, D.C. prior to that, she worked in the Middle east for several years.

And Rasmus Sinding Sundergad is a historian and senior researcher at the Danish Institute for International studies, specializing in U.S. foreign policy and transatlantic relations.

To all of you, welcome and thank you for being with us.

Well, here we are not even a year into Donald Trump's second term, and we're already talking about a possible invasion of Greenland.

Well, well, during the past year of the first of the second Trump administration, we've really seen a lot of developments that are without precedence.

And he has marked this presidency with his unpredictability.

And this we see play out right now with regard to Greenland.

And when we look what's happening around Greenland, there is presidents in the US Breaking international law.

There is presidents in the US Intervening in Latin America.

But what is new now in its quality is that the US Is turning on NATO allies and is threatening the transatlantic alliance, threatening to invade a NATO ally.

And this is shaking Europe to the core right now and would, of course, mean immense insecurity not only in the Atlantic, but also in Europe.

And we're seeing European leaders, of course, trying to avoid that at all costs.

Michael, we saw Denmark's and Greenland's foreign ministers in the White House meeting.

vance, what do you make of that meeting and what resulted from it?

I think it was very, very important to start a dialogue with Americans about Greenland and to buy some time because, yeah, we need some more time to think it over.

And that makes also perfect sense to send some military people to Greenland to find out where we could help and strengthen the defense.

And of Greenland, we're seeing exactly that.

Rasmus, Denmark, Sweden, France and Germany are now deploying troops into Greenland.

Is that the right move and what's the point of it?

Well, officially, the point, of course, is to have an exercise in Greenland that should address some of the security concerns expressed by President Trump and others with regards to increased sort of Russian and Chinese presence in the Arctic in general.

Of course, we all know that the timing and the reason for this sudden European interest in defending Greenland has much more to do with President Trump's demands of control over Greenland.

So in reality, this is, of course, to send a signal to the Americans that Europe, along with Denmark and Greenland, is not willing to go along with his plans to expand U.S. territory.

And one of the big questions, of course, is why?

Suddenly, the world is focused on a frozen island in north.

Greenland may look remote, but its resources, location and military value make it a key player in the future of the Arctic and a hotspot of global interest.

Greenland is the largest island in the world with almost 57,000 inhabitants.

The island is autonomous, but is a part of Denmark.

It is not in the eu, but is a NATO member.

Talking about acquiring, not leasing, not having it.

Short term, we're talking about acquiring.

If we don't do it, Russia or China will, and that's not going to happen when I'm grossing it.

If necessary, Trump is prepared to take Greenland by force, where the US Currently maintains a military base.

One way or the other, we're going to have Greenland.

His main argument is security interests, but the island is also a gateway to the Arctic.

Its ice is melting due to climate change, and new shipping routes are opening up.

Mineral resources also make Greenland highly attractive.

Its rare earths could supply Europe for decades.

In addition, the island holds gold, diamonds, uranium, oil, and natural gas.

If we have to choose between the US And Denmark, we will choose Denmark.

Rasmus, this is not the first time the US Says it wants to buy green let's start with that possible scenario.

Well, first of all, the US has historically expressed an interest in buying Greenland the same way that the U.S. of course, has historically bought large pieces of territory in North America from various European powers.

So that is, you could argue, and Trump argues has historical precedent.

However, of course we thought that we abandoned that practice of buying other people and buying territory with the establishment of the rules based order after 1945.

So in recent time, it is of course unprecedented to suggest that you can buy the territory of another country.

And then very importantly, of course, Greenland has insisted that they are not for sale.

And so then we're not really talking about buying a country.

If the country is not for sale, then we're talking about pressure and coercion instead.

Michelle Trump says owning Greenland, as we saw, is necessary to safeguard the U.S. is that true?

Couldn't Trump, or the U.S. for that matter, have access to the resources and to the military infrastructure with closer cooperation with Denmark, for example?

It would be very easy and as a colleague from Copenhagen knows very pretty well.

So various treaties make it possible, for example, to rebuild or reactivate the former US bases in Greenland.

There was about 14 bases in 1945 and now there is only one Pitufik Space Base, a former famous Thule air base.

So it would be possible with just a minute to send more troops and in a longer way to reactivate the bases.

So it's not necessary to annex Greenland and for, yeah, for mining.

So I guess even she's still the minister responsible for mining in Greenland.

She, she wrote last year an op ed in the Washington Post and backed for more US Investors in, for the mining industry because there's only, just only one American firm interested in holding a license for mining.

So Greenland would I guess welcome more interest in Greenland, but not in occupying Greenland.

So if there is access to both the security and the resources in the current structure, if you will.

Anya, many see imperialistic ambitions by the U.S. under President Donald Trump.

I think there are imperialistic and narcissistic ambitions to portray himself as a ruler of the world who can basically do whatever he wills.

And I also want to build on what Michael just said with regard to the arguments that Trump presents.

If his aim were to secure the Arctic, then NATO would be the first step.

There is no state that is capable of unilaterally securing the Arctic, not the United States, not any other state.

So if you aim at increasing Security in the Arctic, you need cooperation.

NATO would be built is built specifically for that.

But instead of going the way to reinforce NATO's structure, he's threatening the alliance.

Subtitles ListPlay Video

Trump eyes the Arctic: Will Europe defend Greenland? | To the Point

scenario

context

access

situation