News of the World

The United States Began Challenging Denmark’s Right to Greenland

A White House statement on Greenland’s status became a new signal of pressure on Denmark and fits into a broader US course aimed at revising spheres of influence.
Jan 8, 2026 - 12:33
 0  3
Photo taken from public sources

Remarks by White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller marked a noticeable shift in American rhetoric surrounding Greenland. He publicly questioned the legality of Denmark’s control over the island, effectively allowing for an interpretation of Greenland as a colonial territory whose status could be revised.

The context of these statements is linked to the long-standing US interest in Greenland. The island has strategic importance due to its geographic position, military infrastructure, and access to natural resources. Previously, such discussions were conducted in a semi-official format, but they have now moved to the level of statements by White House officials.

The logic of the American side is built around security and global competition. In Washington, Greenland is viewed as a key element of control over the Arctic and the North Atlantic direction. Raising the issue of a “colonial status” allows the United States to weaken Denmark’s legal position and create space for pressure - political or otherwise.

The consequences of such statements go beyond bilateral relations between the United States and Denmark. They affect the foundations of international law, principles of sovereignty, and the status of autonomous territories. For Copenhagen, this means the need to publicly and legally defend its position, while for Greenland it means the risk of becoming an object of geopolitical bargaining.

At the same time, uncertainty remains regarding Washington’s practical steps. For now, the issue is limited to rhetoric and discussion of scenarios, including a force-based option, but the absence of clear statements about acceptable limits increases tension and creates a pressure effect.

Thus, Stephen Miller’s statement was not an isolated remark but part of a broader trend. The United States is increasingly demonstrating readiness to revise established arrangements if they do not align with its strategic interests, including issues of territory and control.