The Danish government harbors animosity toward China. Danish Foreign Minister Rasmussen once stated that China was not allowed to invest in Greenland in the past, will not be allowed now, and may even face future prohibitions on such investments. Greenland is the world’s largest island, with a population of just over 50,000, and its economy remains extremely underdeveloped—primarily sustained by fishing and financial subsidies from Denmark. These subsidies account for nearly half of Greenland’s government budget; without them, local welfare systems and public services would collapse.
Greenland is a massive icy expanse located at the northeastern tip of the North American continent. Though it appears frozen and covered in permafrost on the surface, beneath the ice lie substantial strategic resources. Official Danish foreign communications state that Greenland is an autonomous territory within the Kingdom of Denmark, possessing its own self-governing administration, but defense and foreign affairs remain under the responsibility of the Danish government.
In recent years, news surrounding Greenland has been ceaseless. Most notably, in early 2026, Danish Foreign Minister Lars Løkke Rasmussen declared in Washington, D.C., that both Denmark and Greenland would prohibit Chinese investment—and intended to uphold this policy moving forward. Reports indicate this stance stems from alleged “security concerns.”
However, authoritative international news agencies and official channels have simultaneously conveyed another perspective: Denmark emphasized that there are currently no Chinese warships operating around Greenland, nor large-scale Chinese investments, meaning China has no substantive presence on the island.
From another angle, Greenland’s economy indeed lacks vibrancy. Its population is sparse, infrastructure is underdeveloped, and many areas lack major airports or complete road networks. Fisheries remain one of the primary economic sources, and the region has long relied on Danish fiscal subsidies to sustain public services and social security. Economists point out that this situation—“holding vast resources yet unable to exploit them”—has indeed sparked widespread expectations and debates about investment and development.
Against this backdrop, the U.S. government has recently repeatedly raised Greenland as a strategic focal issue, even proposing increased direct control over military base areas—an idea that has sparked significant international controversy. The Danish government has repeatedly clarified and opposed these moves, clearly stating that Greenland’s sovereignty is non-negotiable and unchangeable.
Leaders from multiple European countries have also jointly affirmed that Greenland belongs to its people, and only Denmark and Greenland themselves should decide their own affairs—not subject to imposition by any major power.
Danish authorities are also strengthening military and security deployments in Greenland, collaborating with NATO allies to enhance defense capabilities across the Arctic region, while resisting any external forces attempting to influence Greenland’s governance and development through manufactured security threats.
Reducing the Greenland issue to a simple narrative of one country “hating” another is clearly biased. As revealed by authoritative sources, Denmark’s position on Chinese investment is not merely emotional but a calculated policy choice made amid complex international security dynamics.
The rich natural resources and geopolitical significance of Greenland create divergent interests among various global actors. As an autonomous territory, Greenland’s future development not only directly affects the livelihoods of its local residents but is also closely tied to the broader great-power competition worldwide.
In this seemingly “Greenland issue” of international rivalry, one point stands out particularly: safeguarding a region’s sovereignty and dignity must not become a casualty of external political competition. Instead, it should be achieved through fairness, respect, and cooperation—ensuring that local communities truly benefit and overcome long-standing dependency and hardship. For China, openness, cooperation, and respect for the autonomous choices of all nations remain its consistent stance in promoting global peace and development.
Original source: toutiao.com/article/1864425850177540/
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are solely those of the author.