Frosty Relations: Why Usha Vance is an ‘unwelcome visitor’ in Greenland | World News

What was intended as a diplomatic charm offensive has snowballed into a geopolitical controversy. A high-profile US visit to Greenland, headlined by Second Lady Usha Vance, National Security Adviser Mike Waltz, and Energy Secretary Chris Wright, has been sharply condemned by leaders in both Nuuk and Copenhagen. Greenland’s Prime Minister Múte B. Egede described the visit as highly aggressive and accused the Trump administration of using soft diplomacy as a cover for imperial ambitions.

A charm offensive gone cold

Usha Vance, the wife of Vice President JD Vance, is scheduled to attend Greenland’s national dogsled race, the Avannaata Qimussersu, with her son and a small US delegation. The White House has presented the trip as a cultural outreach effort aimed at learning about Greenlandic heritage and celebrating unity. However, many Greenlanders remain skeptical. The presence of the Second Lady alongside top US national security and energy officials suggests to local observers that Washington’s interest extends far beyond cultural appreciation.
Prime Minister Egede told local media that the visit had little to do with sled racing and everything to do with showcasing power. He suggested the presence of the national security adviser was intended to assert dominance rather than promote goodwill.

Trump’s renewed annexation ambitions

At the heart of the backlash lies President Donald Trump’s revived ambition to annex Greenland—a proposal he first floated in 2019 and which Denmark had once dismissed as absurd. In his second term, however, Trump appears to have rebranded the notion as a serious policy objective.
Speaking earlier this month during a joint session of Congress, Trump asserted that the United States would acquire Greenland “one way or the other,” turning a previously provocative suggestion into a stated geopolitical goal.
Greenland, while part of the Kingdom of Denmark, enjoys extensive autonomy under home rule. Trump’s remarks, which framed the island as a strategic asset to be acquired, have reignited fears of American expansionism disguised as diplomacy.

The strategic stakes

Greenland’s global significance has surged in recent years. Strategically located at the gateway to the Arctic, the island has become central to geopolitical maneuvering as melting ice opens new shipping lanes and exposes valuable natural resources. The United States already operates the Pituffik Space Base (formerly Thule Air Base) in northern Greenland—a legacy of the Cold War that remains vital today.
Yet it’s not just geography that matters. Greenland is believed to have abundant reserves of rare earth elements—critical to everything from smartphones to advanced defense systems. With China currently dominating the rare earths market, Washington sees Greenland as a potential counterbalance and a strategic priority.

Poor timing, political fallout

The timing of the visit has only heightened tensions. Greenland held parliamentary elections earlier this month, resulting in a loss of majority for Egede’s Inuit Ataqatigiit party. Though he remains the caretaker prime minister, coalition talks are ongoing. Jens-Frederik Nielsen, whose party is expected to lead the next government, also criticized the visit.
Nielsen argued that the Americans were fully aware of the political uncertainty in Greenland yet chose to proceed with the trip regardless. He characterized the timing as disrespectful and indicative of a power play rather than a gesture of goodwill.
Public frustration was visible in Nuuk on March 15, when protesters gathered outside the US consulate—an unusual sight in Greenland’s typically quiet capital. Demonstrators carried signs denouncing American imperialism and condemned Trump’s rhetoric as relics of colonial ambition.

Denmark treads carefully

Denmark, which still holds authority over Greenland’s defense, foreign policy, and security, reacted with measured concern. Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen said the visit was being taken seriously and emphasized that any cooperation with the United States must respect the fundamental principles of sovereignty.
Though Denmark remains a close ally of the US through NATO and other international forums, Frederiksen’s tone underscored growing unease over Washington’s increasingly assertive stance in the Arctic—particularly when it risks inflaming tensions in Greenland.

The polls, the protests, and the pressure

Boys play on a frozen beach in Nuuk, Greenland, Tuesday, March 11, 2025. (AP Photo/Evgeniy Maloletka)

Despite the growing friction, Greenlandic leaders have signaled that while annexation is out of the question, collaboration with the US is not. They remain open to developing partnerships in tourism, rare earth mining, infrastructure, and diplomacy—provided these relationships are built on mutual respect and recognition of Greenland’s long-term aspirations, including independence from Denmark.
A January poll underscored local sentiment, revealing that 85% of Greenlanders opposed becoming part of the United States. Nearly half saw Trump’s renewed interest as a direct threat to their sovereignty.
Adding to the unease, Donald Trump Jr., during a January visit to Greenland, posted on social media that the island was an incredible place and that its people would benefit tremendously if—and when—it became part of the United States. He claimed the US would protect and cherish Greenland from a hostile outside world, concluding with the now-infamous phrase: Make Greenland Great Again.
Comments like these have only reinforced perceptions that Washington sees Greenland not as a partner, but as a prize.

Charm veiled in coercion

On the surface, the image of the Second Lady attending a dogsled race with her child might seem innocuous. But the broader context casts a long shadow—this is not simply cultural diplomacy. This is a strategic mission unfolding amid open declarations by a sitting US president that he intends to annex the land she’s visiting.
Greenlanders interpret the visit not as an olive branch, but as subtle coercion. With top-level US officials assessing a geopolitically sensitive region under the guise of cultural outreach, the message feels less like unity and more like veiled intent.
To Washington, this may look like opportunity. But to Nuuk, it feels like encroachment. And for all the talk of diplomacy and heritage, Greenland’s response remains clear: the island is not for sale. Not now. Not “one way or the other.”