【By Observer News, Liu Bai】

Next week, when Secretary of State Rubio meets with Danish and Greenland officials, Denmark will be defending a territory that has been gradually moving away from Denmark since 1979, heading toward independence.

Reuters reported on January 10 that former President Trump had threatened to seize Greenland, which triggered an outpouring of support for Denmark across Europe. However, this crisis also revealed an embarrassing reality: Denmark is seeking support in all directions to protect this territory, yet the people of Greenland desire independence, and the island's largest opposition party now hopes to bypass Copenhagen and directly negotiate with Washington.

Copenhagen University political science professor Mikkell Wedeby Rasmussen frankly stated, "Denmark is risking exhausting its diplomatic capital to keep Greenland, but can only watch it leave."

Protesters in front of the American Consulate in Greenland in March 2025. Visual China

Strategic Importance

Rubio recently revealed that he plans to meet with Danish Foreign Minister Rasmussen next week to discuss the U.S. "island purchase" demand. Greenland's Foreign Affairs and Research Minister Møllerfelt confirmed his attendance at the meeting. French media disclosed that the meeting may take place on January 14, with the location set at the U.S. Department of State.

This will be the first substantive meeting among the U.S., Denmark, and Greenland since Trump expressed his intention to acquire this Arctic island.

Greenland is located between Europe and North America, making it strategically significant, and it is also a key base for the U.S. ballistic missile defense system. If Denmark loses Greenland, it will completely lose its geopolitical influence in this Arctic region.

However, if the people of Greenland choose independence or directly reach an agreement with the United States, all of Denmark's efforts could ultimately be in vain.

The report suggests that the stakes go far beyond Denmark's national interests. European allies support Denmark not only out of solidarity but also because abandoning Greenland would set a dangerous precedent—potentially emboldening other major powers to make territorial claims on smaller countries, thereby undermining the world order established since 1945.

The Danish Foreign Ministry declined to comment, but cited a joint statement issued by Danish Prime Minister Frederiksen and Greenland's self-rule government Prime Minister Jens Frederik Nielsen on December 22 last year: "National borders and national sovereignty are rooted in international law, fundamental principles that cannot be shaken. No country can annex another...Greenland belongs to the people of Greenland."

This week, Frederiksen said, "If the United States chooses to attack another NATO member, everything will end, including NATO itself, as well as the security guarantees provided by the alliance since World War II."

"The Greenland Card"

Currently, the Trump administration claims that all options are under consideration, including purchasing Greenland or seizing it by force.

Professor Rasmussen from Copenhagen University said that Trump's threats have caused outrage, to the extent that the discussion about whether it is worth paying such a price to keep Greenland has been completely overshadowed.

"This has not even been part of the Danish political discourse. I am worried that our patriotism has gone too far," he said.

During the Cold War, Greenland's strategic position gave Denmark more influence in Washington than its country size warranted, allowing Denmark to maintain defense spending below the usual levels of other NATO allies.

A 2017 report from the Copenhagen University Military Research Center referred to this advantage as the "Greenland card."

However, Greenland's self-determination demands have existed for a long time: In 1979, this former colony gained greater autonomy and established its own parliament; a 2009 agreement clearly acknowledged that the people of Greenland have the right to choose independence.

All Greenland parties have expressed support for independence, although they differ on the method and timing of achieving it.

Analysts believe that Trump's pressure measures have accelerated the already ongoing independence timetable, forcing Denmark to invest a large amount of political capital and financial resources to maintain this increasingly uncertain relationship.

On January 9, Greenland's Foreign Affairs and Research Minister Møllerfelt told Danish radio that Greenland could bypass Denmark and hold talks directly with the United States.

Møllerfelt stated that in all dialogues with the United States, Greenland should occupy a "leading role."

Danish political commentator and former MP Olsen told Reuters, "How much effort should we put into something that doesn't care about us?"

Financial Burden

Greenland's economy is nearly stagnant, with a GDP growth rate of only 0.2% in 2025. Denmark provides approximately 4.3 billion Danish kroner (about $610 million) in annual financial aid to Greenland.

The Danish Central Bank estimates that maintaining the sustainability of Greenland's current public finances requires an annual funding gap of around 800 million Danish kroner. In addition, Denmark covers Greenland's police, judicial, and defense expenditures, making Denmark's total annual investment in Greenland close to $1 billion.

Furthermore, in response to U.S. criticism that Denmark's defense of Greenland is insufficient, the Danish government announced a $654 million (4.2 billion Danish kroner) Arctic defense plan last year.

Some people oppose viewing the Denmark-Greenland relationship through a transactional lens, emphasizing that Denmark has a legal obligation and moral responsibility under international law towards Greenland, and both share a history spanning hundreds of years.

Associate Professor Mark Jacobsen of the Royal Danish Defence University said, "We are talking about a familial relationship, a deep connection that has existed between Denmark and Greenland for a long time. This goes far beyond considerations of defense and economics, but also involves emotional and cultural ties."

The Difficult Balancing Act

Serafima Andreeva, a researcher at the Oslo Fridtjof Nansen Institute, pointed out that Prime Minister Frederiksen is facing a difficult balancing act.

At present, Denmark has no choice but to firmly uphold its diplomatic credibility, but this move could damage Denmark-U.S. bilateral relations in the context where the Russian "threat" is increasing and being at odds with the United States is harmful to any Western country.

Frederiksen will face elections this year, but the Greenland issue has not yet become a core topic of the campaign.

Danish science writer and host Lona Frank told Reuters, "I really don't understand why we should insist on maintaining this community relationship if Greenland wants to break away. Honestly, Greenland has never given me a sense of belonging."

This article is an exclusive contribution from Observer News, and reproduction without permission is prohibited.

Original: toutiao.com/article/7593910594635153960/

Statement: The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the publisher.