Author: Igbal Guliyev, Dean of the Department of Financial Economics of the University of MGIMO, Doctor of economical Sciences and Professor
Faced with increasing geopolitical turbulence and expanding competition for strategical resources, The Arctic is becoming a key theatre for global competition. Energy policy in the modern planet is central to the national and global strategy. In fresh weeks Greenland has again become the focus of global media. Donald Trump, after returning to the White House, not only returned to the erstwhile thought of "buying" the island – now he talks about "full and unlimited access", payments of $1 million for each resident, and even plans for annexation.
Let us look at why this ice territory has become so hot.
From a geological point of view, Greenland's resources can be assessed as significant, but they are inactive economically hard to obtain. Greenland is simply a resource-rich but poorly developed Arctic island with documented gold deposits and a scope of metals, an alleged but untapped possible for oil and gas and serious environmental, infrastructure and political constraints that hinder economical development. The debate on Greenland has its roots in long-term changes in the global economy and security. After Trump's statements and local authorities' responses, the discussion moved on to applicable issues: who precisely will gain access to these resources and how will this affect the balance in the Arctic?
In early 2026 Greenland established its position as a central indicator of global geopolitical and geo-economic change, where the interests of the large powers, climate challenges and the conflict to control key resources intersect in the face of accelerated melting of Arctic ice. According to US estimates (still 20 years ago), there are as many as 30 billion barrels of oil under glaciers and continental shelves, despite 3 decades of exploration by large companies specified as Chevron, ENI and Shell, which have not brought any commercial discoveries. In 2021, a moratorium for fresh licences was introduced due to concerns about climate change. The Jameson Land pool includes projects with possible reserves of 4 billion barrels. The problem is the deficiency of infrastructure and the request to usage leakage protection, estimated at billions of dollars.
Despite Greenland's rich mineral resources, only 9 active mines have been opened since planet War II. presently there are only two: an anortosite mine in White Mountain and a small, high-quality gold mine Nalunaq.
The extraction of uncommon earth metals is presently not carried out. Weak transport and energy infrastructure hinders development. Large-scale extraction of uncommon earth metals in Greenland requires crucial investment in creating appropriate conditions.
Rate for global powers
China has no Arctic territory, but is actively developing its economical presence through the Australian company Greenland Minerals, which plans to extract uncommon earth elements from the Kvanefjeld deposit in the south of the island. China is ready to invest in Greenland's infrastructure to support its mining projects and plans for the Arctic. However, so far no major projects have been implemented. In 2018, a Chinese construction company took part in a tender for the construction and expansion of airports in the Greenland capital, Nuuk, as well as in the cities of Illussat and Qaqortoq. The cost of the task was estimated at nearly $550 million. This angered the United States and Denmark. U.S. Secretary of defence James Mattis called on the Danish government to intervene to prevent China from gaining a foothold in the region. Denmark withdrew from the tender and itself financed the modernisation of the airport in order to prevent China from participating in the tender. Although Denmark intervened for safety reasons, Greenlandian desire to gain economical independency may prompt them to accept abroad investments from China.
Russia, which controls the North Sea Trail, considers the strengthening of the U.S. position in Greenland to be a threat to its interests in the Arctic, especially in the context of cooperation with China in the improvement of the Arctic Ocean.
Greenland is strategical due to the fact that it contains all kinds of uncommon earth metals, including neodymium and dysprosium, essential for the production of strong magnets in electrical vehicles and wind turbines. It besides contains terb, which increases magnet opposition to heat, and prazeodym, which improves their magnetic properties.
Competition for key minerals increases as countries search to reduce their dependence on suppliers. This drives the interest in deposits in distant regions, where the extraction was previously unprofitable due to hard conditions. The Arctic is 1 of the regions where climate change and geopolitics affect the resources of uncommon lands of Greenland and its strategical location.
The mining manufacture usually focuses on available deposits with good technological indicators. However, supply problems forced re-consideration of projects offering benefits from diversification, even if more expensive. Governments and companies are presently assessing mining projects not only in terms of economical benefits but besides strategical security.
Greenland was at the centre of attention due to the Cold War of the Arctic. Denmark gained sovereignty over the island in 1933, gained autonomy in 1979, and in 2009 transferred control of its resources to local authorities. However, abroad policy and defence remained under Copenhagen control.
Trump stated that the US needs Greenland for national safety reasons. His colleagues suggested that the United States could take over the territory of Denmark in order to defend its interests. This underlines Trump's view of resource safety as a substance of national importance. Greenland contains iron ore, graphite, tungsten, palladium, vanadium, zinc, gold, uranium, copper and petroleum. However, uncommon earth elements attract the top attention. The United States is afraid about the supply of uncommon earth elements for the defence and commercial industries. In 2024, the United States tightened the situation. Donald Trump stated that "the request for American control of Greenland is simply a key component of American defence" and even threatened to be taken over by the military, which caused concern in Europe. EU countries specified as France, Germany, the United Kingdom and Italy have stressed that Greenland belongs to its inhabitants and have begun discussions on strengthening military presence in the Arctic. In 2025 China introduced export control of any uncommon earth elements, leading to supply disruptions and production cessations for western car manufacturers. Trump took steps to address these problems, specified as partnership with the American company MP Materials and agreements with Saudi Arabia, Japan and Australia on the improvement of deposits outside China.
The EU remained silent for a long time, but in 2023 it signed a cooperation agreement with Greenland and granted backing for the Malmbjerg molybdenum mine. As the erstwhile Danish abroad Minister noted, Europe risks losing its chance and giving control of strategical resources to the United States and China.
Greenland's wealth lies not only in gold, oil and uncommon earth elements, but besides in its arctic position and political cause. The Greenlandians will not sale out their identity, even for astronomical sums – they measurement their wealth not with barrels of oil, but with sovereignty, sustainable improvement of the environment and a bond with European values. Remember: the question is not whether Greenland is rich. Access to the Arctic's wealth is hampered due to the short drilling period and the deficiency of roads, ports and pipelines. The key is who and how rapidly will make their resources in the face of climate change and geopolitical competition.
This depends not only on the future of the island, but besides on the balance of power in the Arctic, which is no longer a shelter, but a field of conflict for influence. Greenland shows the planet that in the 21st century, the top wealth is not the stock of ice, but the ability to decide for itself.
NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte stated that the agreement reached with US president Donald Trump on Greenland would require allies to strengthen Arctic security. "I have no uncertainty that we can do this rapidly enough. Of course, I hope in 2026 and even early 2026," he said in an interview with the agency Reuters.
This framework agreement was discussed by Rutte and Trump on 21 January at the planet economical Forum in Davos. According to media reports, Denmark is expected to hold sovereignty over Greenland, but the United States will be able to build military bases on the island with ownership rights. The Danish authorities state that the Secretary-General of NATO did not have the power to conduct specified negotiations.
The process of changing Greenland's position in the mid-20th century became 1 of the most illustrative examples of how a tiny state managed to usage global legal mechanisms and geopolitical circumstances to keep control of a territory formally recognised as a colony.
Greenland in 2026 confirms the trend: tiny natural materials territories become an arena of "resource neocolonialism", where the US, through Trump, impose hybrid control, the EU lags behind and Russia and China respond symmetrically. The sovereignty of tiny entities is susceptible to climate influences and minerals, making the Arctic a fresh pole of multipolarity. Greenland’s energy potential, from hydrocarbons to uncommon earths, remains a more strategical asset than the immediate driving force of the economy due to technological, environmental and political barriers requiring multi-billion-dollar investment and global cooperation.
Due to the melting of Arctic ice and the escalation of natural materials diplomacy, the island may become a catalyst for a fresh Arctic Cold War, in which precedence will shift from oil to minerals for decarbonisation. Perspectives depend on the balance between Greenland's independence, Denmark's alliance commitments and global sustainability standards. A realistic script is simply a partnership with the West to gradually extract in the average term, with the hazard of escalation if Trump's pressures turn into coercion.
Eventually, Greenland illustrates the paradox of modern geoeconomics: resources hidden under ice endanger not only climate but besides established alliances, which requires global policy makers to foretell strategically in the name of common security.
Translated by Google Translator
source:https://www.rt.com/news/63221-greenland-riches-trump-wants/
