United States President Donald Trump over the weekend raised the temperature in his dispute over Greenland, an autonomous territory of Denmark.
On the Truth Social network, the republican leader announced tariffs against eight allied countries, Denmark, Norway, Sweden, France, Germany, the United Kingdom, the Netherlands and Finland, which oppose the annexation of the island in the Arctic.
Starting February 1, the American government will charge a 10% tariff on all exports from these countries to the United States, a rate that will be raised to 25% on June 1, “until an agreement is reached for the complete and total purchase of Greenland” by the Americans, Trump wrote.
While the affected countries are considering retaliating with the so-called “commercial bazooka”, an issue has begun to be debated more vigorously in recent days: if a purchase is completed (a scenario that is currently unlikely), how much would the United States spend on this acquisition and to administer Greenland?
Last week, the broadcaster NBC cited sources informed about the White House’s calculations who stated that the purchase of the island alone would cost up to US$700 billion to American coffers, an estimate that was made by experts and former government employees as part of the planning for acquiring the territory.
Alone, this amount would represent 70% of the entire United States defense budget for 2026 – Trump has reiterated that he wants Greenland for national security purposes, isolating China and Russia from the island.
However, analysts interviewed by the business magazine Fortune stated that the total value could reach US$ 1 trillion in the next two decades, also counting the investments that would need to be made on the island.
According to the report, in addition to the US$700 billion purchase, hundreds of billions of dollars would be needed to develop the territory’s infrastructure, “with a wait of ten to 20 years before any significant commercial success is observed.”
The United States would also need to assume US$700 million in annual subsidies to pay for education, health and other services for the population (Greenland has around 56 thousand inhabitants), highlighted Fortune.
Today, the island does not produce oil and has only two active mines (gold and anorthosite) and rare earth and oil projects by American companies are still in the early stages.
Malte Humpert, senior researcher and founder of the think tank The Arctic Institute, told Fortune that Greenland’s economic insignificance stems from its extreme weather conditions, as the exploitation of the island’s natural resources would require billion-dollar investments, with no guarantee of a significant return.
“You’re dealing with ice, polar bears, darkness, power outages, the frozen sea, freezing temperatures. It’s probably one of the most inhospitable places on Earth,” Humpert said. “The fact that this [exploração dos recursos locais] not having been done before — when it could have been done — is all you need to know. It’s very difficult to make this economically viable.”
In an interview with Fox News in 2024, Trump’s advisor and current US ambassador to the UN, Mike Waltz, said that the Republican’s team was interested in Greenland’s “critical minerals” and “natural resources”.
However, last month, Trump declared that his administration’s undertaking does not have economic objectives. “We need Greenland for national security, not for minerals,” he said.
