Greenland PM says force unlikely, urges readiness
He warned that as a NATO member, any escalation involving Greenland would ripple beyond the region, affecting global security.
Greenland must nevertheless be prepared for all possible scenarios. His remarks come amid renewed international attention following comments by U.S. President Donald Trump, who has once again floated the idea of taking control of the strategically located territory.
Speaking at a press conference in Nuuk, Greenland’s main city, Nielsen underlined that his government does not believe an armed confrontation is imminent. At the same time, he made it clear that dismissing the possibility outright would be irresponsible.
Though sparsely populated, the island holds immense strategic value due to its location in the Arctic, proximity to North America and Europe, and growing importance as melting ice opens new shipping routes and access to natural resources. These factors have increasingly drawn the attention of global powers, particularly as competition in the Arctic intensifies.
Nielsen stressed that Greenland’s security cannot be viewed in isolation. As part of the Kingdom of Denmark, the island falls under the broader security umbrella of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). His words were a reminder that any conflict involving Greenland would not simply be a regional issue, but one with wider implications for international stability.
The Prime Minister’s comments were clearly aimed at reinforcing two parallel messages: first, that Greenland does not see war as inevitable; and second, that preparedness is essential in an increasingly unpredictable global environment. “That’s why we must be ready for all possibilities,” Nielsen said, adding that readiness should not be confused with aggression or panic. Instead, he framed preparedness as a responsible posture for a territory whose strategic importance has grown rapidly in recent years.
Trump’s past remarks about acquiring Greenland, first made during his earlier presidency, were widely dismissed at the time as unrealistic. However, the re-emergence of such statements has unsettled officials in Nuuk and Copenhagen, prompting renewed efforts to assert Greenland’s sovereignty and political agency. Nielsen’s measured response reflects an awareness that even unlikely scenarios must be taken seriously when they involve powerful actors and sensitive geopolitical regions.
At the same time, the Greenlandic leader was careful to emphasise diplomacy and cooperation over confrontation. By highlighting NATO membership and collective security, he implicitly pointed to established international frameworks as the primary means of managing tensions. The message was that Greenland’s future lies in cooperation with allies, not in being treated as a bargaining chip in great-power politics.
The situation also underscores a broader shift in how Arctic regions are perceived. Once considered remote and peripheral, they are now central to discussions on climate change, security, energy and global trade. For Greenland, this growing attention brings both opportunities and challenges — economic interest on one hand, and strategic pressure on the other.
Nielsen’s remarks suggest that Greenland’s leadership is keenly aware of this dual reality. By acknowledging risks without exaggerating them, he sought to reassure citizens while signalling to the international community that Greenland expects its sovereignty and security to be respected. The emphasis on preparedness, rather than fear, reflects a pragmatic approach shaped by the island’s evolving role on the world stage.
In the end, the Prime Minister’s message was one of calm vigilance. Military force may be unlikely, he said, but in a world marked by shifting alliances and sharper rhetoric, Greenland cannot afford complacency. Preparedness, partnership and respect for international norms, Nielsen implied, remain the strongest safeguards for the Arctic island and for global stability as a whole.