(L/R) US Vice President JD Vance and Secretary of State Marco Rubio depart the Eisenhower Executive Office Building on the White House campus after a meeting with Danish Foreign Minister Lars Løkke Rasmussen and Greenland’s Foreign Minister Vivian Motzfeldt in Washington, DC, on Jan. 14, 2026.
Brendan Smialowski | AFP | Getty Images
Any U.S. attempt to seize Greenland by force would trigger “monumental consequences” for the Western alliance and the global order, Iceland’s former President Olafur Ragnar Grimsson said, as President Donald Trump sharpens rhetoric on controlling the Arctic territory.
Grimsson warned on CNBC’s “Access Middle East” that “the fallout would be on a scale that we have never seen in living memory.” Grimsson, the longest-serving president of Iceland from 1996 to 2016, currently serves as the Chairman of the Arctic Circle, the world’s largest annual gathering on Arctic issues.
Trump has framed Greenland — an autonomous region within the Kingdom of Denmark — as central to U.S. national security, saying China and Russia were building up their presence in the region.
A meeting at the White House between officials from Greenland, Denmark and the U.S. Wednesday ended with “fundamental disagreement” over the ownership of the island, a Danish official said following the meeting, adding that both sides would continue to talk.
Trump doubled down on his rhetoric on Greenland ahead of the talks, saying on social media that anything less than Greenland becoming a part of the United States was “unacceptable.”
Greenland Prime Minister Jens-Frederik Nielsen made it clear Tuesday that the country would choose Denmark over the United States if it had to make a choice.
Grimsson pointed out that concerns about Russia or China’s growing influence in the Arctic were overblown. “At the present there is not a direct, clear, obvious threat from Russia and China in the Arctic,” he said.
China’s most prominent role is in Russia’s Arctic zone, where it has been involved in mining, energy resources exploration and potentially in military exercises, said Grimsson. Beyond that — across the Canadian, U.S. and Nordic Arctic — “China is not a big player,” while Russia “is not there,” he added.
U.S. should ‘start at home,’ not ‘buy Greenland’
Grimsson also argued that if Trump’s goal is a stronger U.S. posture in the Arctic, Washington should focus on domestic capacity. The U.S. is “already an Arctic country,” he said, noting its Arctic expanse is larger than Texas.
Trump’s successive administrations have underinvested in infrastructure such as icebreakers and ports in America’s Arctic, leaving the U.S. behind its rivals, he added. “If you want an enhanced presence in the Arctic, start at home,” Grimsson said, pointing to the absence of a major harbor in the U.S. Arctic.
It is unclear what strategic or economic advantage Washington would gain from overtaking Greenland, the Arctic leader said, noting that existing arrangements already give the U.S. extensive latitude.
“There are no barriers at the moment for enhanced American security or business presence within Greenland,” he said. “Since we have not heard any more detailed explanation for this desire, it’s very difficult to understand concretely what it is about.”
Instead, Grimsson suggested Trump’s worldview — shaped by his background in real estate — may be influencing the fixation on territory. “He is probably the first major global leader who had all his training and thinking done through the real estate business,” he said. “Real estate guys think in locations.”
When asked whether Trump could take Greenland by force, Grimsson said a military move was conceivable given the imbalance of power and Greenland’s small population, but warned the political costs would be unprecedented.
“Yes, of course, it’s possible,” he said, but “the question is … what is it going to do with it, apart from .. putting the flag of the United States and acquiring location.”
