Security

Greenland voted

Under normal circumstances, Greenland’s elections receive sparse, if any, international attention. But the elections for its parliament, the Inatsisartut, on 11th of March were different. Regardless of a turnout of just under 29.000 out of roughly 40.000 eligible voters, the island found itself in the middle of the geopolitical spotlight. Triggered by President Trump’s repeated demands for the US to acquire the island, the election was seen as an indicator of Greenland’s population’s views on both independence and relations with Denmark and the US.

So, why Greenland? The island is strategically located in the increasingly important Arctic region, providing access to vital maritime trade routes. It also possesses substantial reserves of natural resources and rare earth minerals. Amid broader geopolitical tensions, this strategic position has not gone unnoticed and has led to heightened interest in its future political direction and affiliation.

Greenland in Transition

Greenland was colonised by Denmark in the 18th century, and since then, it has formally remained part of Denmark. Independence movements have been present in Greenland for many years, culminating in the granting of autonomy in 1979, when its first parliament was formed, and self-governance in 2009. Denmark has continued to provide financial support and still controls foreign affairs, defence and monetary policy. The ambitions for further independence have so far been hindered by Greenland’s weak economy, which is primarily based on fishing and small industries. What is more, 50% of the population is employed in the public administration, leading to high administrative costs.

Today’s geopolitical situation has shifted the debate over Greenland’s international status. Whereas independence discussions were previously a matter between Greenland and Denmark, they have now become part of a geopolitical power game. Climate change will open up new Arctic trade routes, making it easier and less expensive to access Greenland’s resources. This has sparked the interest of foreign powers, such as China and the US, who seek to (further) increase their presence on the island. The US has an important military base on the northwestern coast of the island, the Pituffik Space Base, and wants to expand its military presence to uphold its control over the region.

While Chinese attempts at gaining a foothold have focussed on Greenland’s critical infrastructure and the extraction of rare earth minerals, Washington has been a lot more straightforward in its approach. President Trump announced in Congress last week that the US would acquire the whole of Greenland “one way or the other“, hinting at the possibility of a military intervention. However, that still seems like a distant scenario for now, as the Trump Administration is initially seeking closer ties by promising to make Greenlanders “rich”.

Political Parties on Independence

A decision on independence, the relationship with Denmark and possible closer ties with the US ultimately rests on the Greenlanders themselves. As such, the elections were seen as a good indicator of the appetite among the population to pursue any of the options.

Greenland has five political parties. The current government, which now acts in a caretaker capacity, consists of left-wing Inuit Ataqatigiit and the Social Democratic Siumut. Both parties have historically been part of the ruling coalition and are considered moderate forces in the independence debate. In the pro-independence camp, the Nalereq party is the most outspoken supporter of immediate independence, proposing a nationwide referendum on the issue. It is also the only party in favour of closer ties with the US. The social liberal Demokraatit party is also pro-independence, but warns for rushing the process. Its party leader, Jens-Frederik Nielsen, also expressed significant concerns regarding Trump's interest in Greenland, saying that he is “a threat to our political independence”. The parliament is completed by the small centre-right Atassut party, which argues for maintaining the status quo.

Two clear winners

Greenland is a country with very little election polling and this led to a surprise when the first results were published. Unexpectedly, the liberal Demokraatit party more than tripled its results in comparison to the 2021 elections, from 9.1% up to 29.9%. This makes them the biggest party in Greenland. The second winner of the elections is the Naleraq party that was able to double its result from 12% up to 24.5% and is now the second largest party in Greenland. The election’s losers are the two governing parties, Inuit Ataqatigiit and Siumut, who lost a combined 30% in comparison to the last elections. The Atassut party gained slightly and won 7.3% of the vote.

Surprisingly, it seems that the broader discussion on independence or closer ties with the US may not have been as dominant as expected. The big winners, Demokraatit, had a quiet approach to the independence discussion compared to the other parties. They instead focussed on issues closer to the day-to-day lives of Greenlanders, such as reducing the tax burden and boosting economic growth. With both ruling parties losing and the opposition parties winning, the election result can also be read as a call from voters to break with old politics and embark on a new path going forward. However, the voters are divided on where that path should lead.

Outlook for the Future

It seems unlikely that there will be short-term changes to the status quo, as there is no clear majority for either immediate independence or closer ties with the US. Additionally, Greenland’s economic dependence on Denmark cannot be rapidly reduced. Measures such as opening up to foreign investment to promote resource extraction or tying Greenland more closely to the US have been proposed, but only have parliamentary support from Naleraq. In terms of the general political outlook, much will depend on the coalition that the Demokraatit party will now seek to form. The choice of coalition partner(s) will give an indication of Greenland’s future geopolitical positioning, although radical changes are not in the cards.

From a European perspective, it would be wise to step up engagement with Greenland. The island’s access to natural resources presents an opportunity for diversifying supply chains and supporting the EU’s strategic autonomy goal. What is more, Greenland’s location is critical in terms of access to new trade routes to Europe. With voters divided over the question of the country’s political direction, the election result presents an opening for the EU to invest in stronger relations with Greenland. Not only to support Denmark against American pressure but also to engage with Greenland as a partner in its own right.