Greenland’s business minister, Naaja Nathanielsen, recently spoke with the Financial Times about the need for foreign investment to help diversify the island’s economy. She emphasized that while Greenland is eager to partner with American and European investors, they may need to look to China if the U.S. and EU do not step up. Nathanielsen expressed hope that the Trump administration would engage more with Greenland, particularly in developing its mineral sector, but noted that the island does not wish to become overly dependent on the U.S.
Nathanielsen has previously highlighted the potential for American investment in various sectors beyond mining, suggesting that there are numerous opportunities for growth. However, she pointed out that any significant investment would require not just funding but also skilled labor and infrastructure development.
The conversation about Greenland’s economic future comes amid growing geopolitical tensions. Nathanielsen acknowledged that Greenland is struggling to find its place in a changing world, where both the U.S. and China are seen as aggressive actors. She believes the EU could be a natural partner, especially in terms of environmental alignment, but she is concerned that the EU lacks the necessary investment capacity and expertise to help Greenland reach its potential.
Security concerns also play a role in this discussion. With China’s close ties to Russia and its involvement in the Ukraine conflict, Nathanielsen noted that European nations might hesitate to allow significant Chinese investment in Greenland, especially given its strategic location overlooking vital northern trade routes.
The U.S. already has a military base in Greenland that is underutilized. Upgrading this base could bring billions into the local economy and create jobs for the small population. Additionally, there are opportunities in the tourism sector. Many tourism operations in Greenland are government-controlled, which limits private investment. Former U.S. Ambassador to Denmark, Carla Sands, suggested that fostering a private tourism industry could greatly benefit the island, drawing inspiration from Iceland’s success in this area.
Investing in Greenland could be relatively inexpensive compared to U.S. foreign aid spending. Improving infrastructure, such as building a modern airport and enhancing hospitality services, could position Greenland as a key player in Arctic trade and investment. A casual work visa system between Denmark and the U.S. could also create job opportunities for both Danes and Americans.
Representative Davidson, founder of the Congressional Greenland Caucus, emphasized the importance of strengthening ties with Greenland. He warned that if the U.S. does not engage, other nations might fill the void, potentially bringing unfavorable terms.
Greenlanders are wary of the past diplomatic missteps from the U.S. administration but are eager for a stable and beneficial relationship. They recognize that turning to China or Russia could pose long-term security risks. The U.S. has a unique opportunity to build a mutually beneficial partnership with Greenland, focusing on investment and trade without aggressive rhetoric.