COPENHAGEN, Jan 17 – A bipartisan group of United States lawmakers visiting Denmark and Greenland has attempted to calm growing tensions after renewed remarks from President Donald Trump about the strategic Arctic island. Their visit came at a sensitive moment, as comments from Washington about potential economic pressure and even the use of force have unsettled officials and citizens across the Danish kingdom and Europe more broadly.
While the White House has continued to frame Greenland in terms of strategic value and national security, members of Congress struck a notably different tone during meetings and public remarks in Copenhagen. They emphasized partnership, respect for sovereignty, and the long history of cooperation between the United States, Denmark, and Greenland within the NATO alliance.
Allies First
Senator Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, a Republican known for her focus on Arctic issues, underscored that Greenland should be regarded primarily as a trusted partner rather than something to be acquired. Speaking during the delegation’s visit, she said Greenland’s people and institutions matter just as much as its location or natural resources. Her remarks were echoed by Democratic Senator Chris Coons of Delaware, who said the delegation’s goal was to ease tensions and reassure allies at a time when rhetoric from Washington has caused unease.
Coons stressed that the relationship between the American public and the people of Denmark has been built over decades of cooperation, particularly through NATO. Addressing reporters in Copenhagen, he said he hoped Danes would not lose faith in the United States as a reliable ally, noting that the two countries have worked closely together in military, diplomatic, and humanitarian efforts. His comments were reported by international media covering the delegation’s visit.
These statements stood in sharp contrast to recent comments from President Trump, who has repeatedly suggested that the United States should take control of Greenland. The president has argued that Greenland’s geographic position in the Arctic and its untapped reserves of critical minerals make it essential for U.S. national security. He has also claimed that China and Russia are increasingly interested in the island, a point he has used to justify a more aggressive American stance.
In recent days, Trump escalated the issue further by suggesting that the United States could impose tariffs on countries that refuse to support his vision for Greenland. Speaking to journalists at the White House, he said economic pressure might be necessary if allies did not “go along” with U.S. demands. He also declined to rule out the use of military force, remarks that quickly drew condemnation from European leaders and officials in Greenland.
Greenland’s own leadership has been clear in rejecting any suggestion of a takeover. Prime Minister Jens Frederik Nielsen stated earlier this week that Greenland’s future lies within the Kingdom of Denmark. Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen went even further, warning that a forced takeover of Greenland by a NATO member would fundamentally undermine the alliance itself. Her comments were widely circulated by European news organizations and sparked renewed debate about unity within NATO.
Senator Jeanne Shaheen of New Hampshire, another member of the visiting delegation, said such rhetoric risks playing into the hands of rival powers. Speaking in Denmark, she warned that public disputes among allies weaken NATO at a time when unity is essential. According to her, adversaries benefit most when democratic nations are divided and uncertain about each other’s commitments.
European leaders have consistently insisted that decisions about Greenland can only be made by Denmark and Greenland themselves. Officials in Copenhagen reiterated this position while also announcing steps to strengthen defense cooperation in the Arctic. Denmark confirmed it would increase its military presence in Greenland in coordination with allies, a move described by defense officials as purely defensive and focused on regional stability.
Coons highlighted Denmark’s long-standing role as one of Washington’s closest allies, calling it difficult to imagine a more reliable partner. He warned that actions causing Danes to doubt American commitments could have far-reaching consequences beyond the Arctic. If trust is damaged, he said, other nations may begin to question whether U.S. assurances can still be relied upon.
Against this backdrop, diplomatic efforts have continued in Washington. Earlier this week, the foreign ministers of Denmark and Greenland held meetings with U.S. Vice President JD Vance and Secretary of State Marco Rubio. While the talks did not bridge the fundamental disagreements, they did result in plans to establish a joint working group. However, public statements from Copenhagen and the White House differed sharply on what that group would actually address, highlighting the ongoing lack of consensus.
As political leaders debate strategy and sovereignty, the situation is taking an emotional toll on Greenland’s population of nearly 60,000 people. Many residents have expressed fear and confusion over the sudden shift in tone from a country long viewed as a protector and partner. Liv Aurora Jensen, a Greenlandic resident quoted by international media, said the change has been shocking. She described a sense of betrayal, noting that Americans were once widely seen as allies who helped Greenland, not as a potential threat.
Public demonstrations have reflected these concerns. Thousands of people marched through Copenhagen over the weekend, many carrying Greenland’s red and white flag alongside Denmark’s. Protesters held signs calling for respect for sovereignty and opposing any attempt to pressure Greenland into changing its status. Similar rallies were planned in Nuuk, Greenland’s capital, and other cities across the Danish kingdom.
One protester, Elise Riechie, told reporters from a European news agency that the issue goes far beyond Greenland alone. She said the message matters for all small nations, adding that no country should feel it can be bought, pressured, or taken against the will of its people.