US President Donald Trump has escalated his long-standing push for American control over Greenland by announcing a 10 per cent tariff on imports from Denmark, the United Kingdom, France, and other European Union nations.

The declaration, posted on Truth Social on Saturday, targets countries opposing what Trump terms the "Complete and Total purchase of Greenland" by the United States. These tariffs are set to take effect from 1 February, with Trump warning they will rise to 25 per cent on 1 June unless a deal is secured.

This bold move follows Trump's repeated assertions that Greenland's acquisition is vital for US national security. He has argued that the mineral-rich Arctic territory must remain out of reach for adversaries like China and Russia, claiming anything short of full US ownership is "unacceptable."

The tariffs represent a direct economic pressure tactic amid stalled negotiations, coming just a day after Trump hinted at such measures against non-supportive nations.

European leaders have firmly rejected the idea of selling Greenland, insisting that decisions on its future rest solely with Denmark and the island's inhabitants. Denmark, which administers Greenland as an autonomous territory within the Kingdom of Denmark, announced this week an increase in its military presence there, in coordination with allies. French Armed Forces Minister Alice Rufo described this deployment as a clear signal of Europe's readiness to uphold sovereignty in the region.

The White House has dismissed the European military build-up, stating it will not derail Trump's ambitions. On Wednesday, following talks in Washington, Danish representatives highlighted a "fundamental disagreement" with the US over Greenland's status. Denmark's Foreign Minister Lars Løkke Rasmussen reinforced this stance on Thursday, declaring any US acquisition "out of the question" as it violates international rules and infringes on sovereignty.

Greenland's Prime Minister Jens-Frederik Nielsen echoed these sentiments on Tuesday, affirming loyalty to Denmark amid the tensions. "If we have to choose between the United States and Denmark here and now, we choose Denmark. We choose NATO. We choose the Kingdom of Denmark. We choose the EU," Nielsen stated, underscoring the island's alignment with European structures over unilateral American demands.

Public opposition in Denmark has surged, with thousands marching through Copenhagen on Saturday in solidarity with Greenland's self-governance. Protesters waved placards reading "We shape our future", "Greenland is not for sale", and "Greenland is already GREAT", reflecting widespread resistance to external territorial claims. These demonstrations highlight the domestic political stakes for Denmark's government.

Trump's fixation on Greenland dates back to his first term, when he publicly floated the idea of buying the territory, drawing international ridicule. Revived in recent weeks, the proposal invokes historical precedents like the US purchase of Alaska from Russia in 1867 and the Virgin Islands from Denmark in 1917. Critics, however, view it as an anachronistic imperial gambit unfit for the 21st century.

Geopolitically, Greenland's strategic value is undeniable. Spanning over 2.1 million square kilometres—mostly ice-covered—it holds vast reserves of rare earth minerals critical for electronics, renewable energy technologies, and defence systems.

Its position in the Arctic also offers military advantages, including potential airbases and radar installations for monitoring Russian and Chinese activities in a melting polar region increasingly open to shipping and resource extraction.

The US already maintains the Pituffik Space Base in northwest Greenland, a key asset for missile defence and space surveillance under a 1951 defence agreement with Denmark. Trump has cited China's growing investments in Greenlandic infrastructure and mining as a pressing threat, though Copenhagen maintains strict oversight to prevent foreign dominance. Russia, too, has bolstered its Arctic military footprint, amplifying Washington's security concerns.

Economically, the proposed tariffs could disrupt transatlantic trade flows. Denmark's exports to the US, including pharmaceuticals, machinery, and wind turbine components, face immediate risks, as do British and French goods in sectors like luxury items, aerospace, and agriculture. EU officials have signalled potential retaliatory measures, which could escalate into a broader trade war reminiscent of Trump's first-term disputes with the bloc.

From Denmark's perspective, yielding Greenland would unravel its constitutional framework and alienate Inuit communities who prize autonomy gained through a 2009 self-rule act. Greenlanders, numbering around 57,000, rely heavily on Danish subsidies—over 60 per cent of their budget—while pursuing economic independence via fishing, tourism, and nascent mining. Any deal would require approval from Greenland's parliament, which has shown no inclination towards US overtures.

Internationally, the episode tests NATO alliances, with Greenland hosting critical infrastructure for the alliance's Arctic defence. France and the UK, both with Arctic interests, have voiced support for Danish sovereignty, while the EU views the tariffs as coercive diplomacy undermining multilateral norms. Analysts warn that Trump's approach risks alienating partners at a time when unity against authoritarian expansionism is paramount.

As the 1 February deadline looms, diplomatic channels remain open but fraught. Backroom talks could yet yield compromises, such as expanded US access to Greenlandic resources or bases without outright purchase. Yet Trump's uncompromising rhetoric—"Complete and Total"—suggests little room for manoeuvre, potentially forcing Europe to dig in.

This saga underscores shifting Arctic power dynamics, where climate change, resource scarcity, and great-power rivalry converge. For India, observing from afar as a rising Arctic stakeholder with its own northern interests, the Greenland dispute offers lessons in balancing sovereignty, alliances, and economic leverage amid assertive US foreign policy under Trump. The coming months will reveal whether tariffs bend European resolve or ignite fiercer pushback.

Agencies