https://www.reuters.com/world/poll-shows-85-greenlanders-do-... ("Greenlanders overwhelmingly oppose becoming part of the United States, poll shows" / "only 6% of Greenlanders are in favour of their island becoming part of the U.S.")

Here's a joint statement from yesterday by every major political party in Greenland speaking in unison, which you can't post on HN because it offends Americans and they flag these things on sight, though they desire to own the people who are speaking. ("The mineral riches hiding under Greenland's ice" (214 comments) is, of course, welcomed by HN). You're invited to translate it for yourself, as they have pointedly not released official statements in English, which is not and never has been their language.

https://siumut.gl/inuiattut-ataatsimoorpugut/ (Greenlandic)

https://dk.siumut.gl/vi-star-sammen-som-et-folk/ (Danish)

> "Ameerikkamiuunianngilagut, qallunaajunianngilagut, Kalaaliuniarpugut."

Once you are in power and you have things arranged the way you want, you claim that violence is not the answer.

Otherwise, practically speaking might makes right.

So for Greenlanders and those opposed to the US imperialism, it makes sense to say that the rule of existing law must prevail, regardless of the fact that there is no traditional military willing and able to back this up.

However, if you are American and you stand to benefit, what you want to happen is backed up by the most powerful military the world has ever seen.

And I bet a good chunk of people in Greenland know that with no roads and no infrastructure, they can go toe to toe with the US military inland, that is until they stop getting shipments of grain. But can even the vaunted US military blockade this continent sized island, especially with zero allies in tow?

So morally speaking, both parties are in the right. But you can predict what the outcome would eventually be, it is very much David vs Goliath, barring Greenlandic alignment with another foreign power in a proxy war.

Ethically speaking, the chronic under development and under investment in the global North is not beneficial to humanity. Viewed from afar, it does seem that Denmark has not been handling this colonial remnant particularly well.

> A poll from January shows that only 6% of Greenlanders are in favor of joining the U.S., with 85% against it.

That would be just $50B - a pretty cheap way to increase the size of the USA by 20%.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_the_Danish_West_Indi...

> During 1916, the two sides agreed to a sale price of $25,000,000, and the United States accepted a Danish demand for a declaration stating that they would "not object to the Danish Government extending their political and economic interests to the whole of Greenland".

Denmark has given the US exclusive and full military access to Greenland but the US does not use it. This has nothing to do with security.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46566444

1. Campaign for Greenland's independence, and apply pressure on Denmark to achieve that. Offer security agreements and trade deals to a newly independent Greenland.

A small majority of Greenlander's support independence today; this number would likely rise if they knew they had strong external support.

2. The trade agreements, security agreements and goodwill of Greenlanders for #1 would bring Greenland into the American sphere of influence.

3. Over time, use carrots and sticks to tie Greenland closer & closer to America.

This strategy has a high likelihood of success, has the moral high ground and would minimize the damage to America's alliances.

The only problem is that it would take multiple decades, and Trump won't be around that long.

It's especially tragicomical when they frame it as a defense measure against Russia - which those same people are generally aligned with.

Europe has a long and sordid history of such colonialist horrors but few perpetrated these crimes so recently.

When you think about the history of Europe you are faced with a society that violently performs genocide repeatedly. Having pacified the population through these eugenic methods they now claim that present day Greenlanders would rather be part of them.

Indeed one is reminded of Crimea, now assuredly Russian, and Donbas which will answer similarly.

Inuit people are understood to have lived in Greenland since as early as 2,500BC and it was reached by Norse seafarers in the first millennium AD, who established settlements lasting several centuries. Modern colonisation began after the arrival of Hans Egede in 1721, acting with the support of what was then Denmark-Norway. During the second world war, when Denmark was occupied by Germany, Greenland was occupied by the US and was returned to Denmark in 1945.

It became part of the kingdom of Denmark in 1953, and in 1979 home rule was introduced. But Denmark still controls Greenland’s foreign and security policy. It has its own parliament, Inatsisartut, and two MPs in the Danish parliament, Folketing. But calls for independence have been growing.

Tensions have escalated significantly between Greenland and Denmark in recent years. There is intense anger in Greenland over investigations into the forced contraceptive (IUD) scandal of the 1960s and 70s, prompting the former Greenlandic prime minister to accuse Denmark of genocide. There have also been protests in Copenhagen and Nuuk over the separation of Greenlandic children from their parents. Denmark has banned the use of highly controversial “parenting competency” tests on Greenlandic people that have resulted in Greenlandic mothers being separated from their children. In September, after years of failing to acknowledge the violations, Denmark officially apologised to the victims of the IUD scandal, in which thousands of Greenlandic women and girls were forcibly fitted with contraceptive coils without their knowledge or consent. And in December, victims won a legal fight with the Danish government to receive compensation.

In recent years there has been growing support for Greenlandic independence. But amid the spectre of Trump’s threat, Greenland in March formed a new four-party coalition government in a show of national unity, with the first page of the coalition agreement stating: “Greenland belongs to us.” The pro-independence party, Naleraq, which is the most US- and Trump-friendly party, came second in the election and is now in opposition. According to a 2009 agreement with Denmark, Greenland must hold a successful referendum before declaring independence.

[1] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/jan/06/why-is-donald-...

Yes it's true, this is how US was built (and almost all countries)

The historical path of Greenland in DK is irrelevant.

- Will the rare earth minerals be mined eventually? As far as I see EU is going into that direction as well, as Greenland became so strategic over time

- What happens with all the land rights that American mineral extraction companies already bought? It means that even if EU/Greenland accepts mining they are already starting from a losing position

- What happens if the American government pays off the people and they want to join US? Will the Danish government still believe in the self determination of Greenland, or it's just political talk?

- what happens after US gets Greenland? Will NATO fall apart and EU get into an even worse position?