Why Does Trump Want Greenland?
The Intersection of Energy, Climate, and Geopolitics
Trump’s interest in Greenland may appear, on the surface, like an eccentric real-estate impulse, but behind it lies a highly rational and long-term strategy. The clearest way to understand this strategy is to read the issue through the lens of energy policies and global power balances.
Energy Policies: The Unspoken Truth That Determines Everything
Closely following the energy sector makes it easier to see what is really happening in the world. Because at the very center of this tension lies a reality that is rarely stated out loud, yet determines all decisions: energy policies.
Trump’s stance on wind turbines, which he has repeatedly voiced in different settings, is highly revealing:
“We’re not going to do the wind thing. Big, ugly wind mills. They ruin your neighborhood … they’re the most expensive form of energy that you can have.”
This quote makes it clear which side the choice will fall on when a decision must be made between fighting the climate crisis and protecting American economic and strategic interests.
And this is not just about Trump. Trump expresses it in a crude and direct way; but what he is really voicing is Washington’s long-term strategic reflex.
Europe Paid the Price, China Reaped the Advantage
Europe has long positioned itself as a leader in climate policy:
- It reshaped its industry accordingly,
- And paid the cost of the transition early, even at the expense of higher energy bills.
China, however, followed a very different path.
- It built its renewable energy infrastructure very early and very aggressively.
- Today, roughly 80% of global solar panel production,
- And more than 70% of the lithium-ion battery supply chain are under China’s control.
This picture presents a simple but uncomfortable equation, especially from a U.S. perspective:
The faster decarbonization accelerates, the more China benefits from the process—mathematically more than the United States.
And Trump had already cited this as a justification when withdrawing from the Paris Climate Agreement.
Why Is the U.S. Reverting to Fossil Fuels?
This is the fundamental reason why America is clinging once again to traditional energy policies, almost as if oil had only just been discovered.
But the U.S. is no longer content with merely slowing the transition; it is also positioning itself to benefit in advance from the opportunities that will inevitably arise from a slower transition.
Why Is Greenland So Important?
This is where Greenland enters the picture.
With climate change:
- Melting ice caps are opening up new trade routes,
- Compared to the Suez Canal, a 10–15 day time advantage emerges on the Asia–Europe route,
- New land areas make rare earth elements, oil, and other strategic underground resources accessible,
- And most importantly, military and geopolitical dominance in the Arctic is being redefined.
In other words, Trump does not see the climate crisis as a disaster, but as:
A geopolitical opportunity to be managed.
The goal is to turn the consequences of climate change to America’s advantage, without allowing China to swallow the large prize already laid before it.
A Historical Echo: The California Energy Crisis
The policies the U.S. is pursuing today are reminiscent of the 2001 California energy crisis.
At the time, Enron traders who took advantage of transmission lines taken offline due to wildfires were using the phrase—later immortalized in films—in their private conversations:
“Burn, baby, burn.”
Today, a similar line seems to echo from far away:
“Melt, baby, melt.”
And Europe still believes this is merely a climate debate.