Karla Jessen Williamson was merely 11 years old when she was moved from Greenland to Denmark for schooling in the 1960s, a measure among several colonial impositions on Greenlanders. Over time, Greenland has achieved increased autonomy from Denmark. However, recent provocations by U.S. President Donald Trump regarding potential acquisition of Greenland have drawn the autonomous territory closer to its colonizer.
This situation has stirred mixed emotions among Greenlanders like Williamson, who, having served on Greenland’s Reconciliation Commission, currently works as an associate professor of education at the University of Saskatchewan. She described Greenlanders as feeling somewhat trapped in a Stockholm syndrome scenario, seeking to address historical relationships while expressing a firm stance of not wanting to align with either Americans or Danes.
Greenland, with a population of 57,000, has been under the domain of the Kingdom of Denmark for nearly 300 years. In 1953, its colonial status was officially abolished, and in 2009, it was granted an extended form of self-governance. Although Denmark still manages Greenland’s foreign affairs and defense policy, and the Danish krone remains the currency, the self-government act outlines a pathway for Greenland to achieve independence. In 2023, a Greenlandic Constitutional Commission proposed strategies for advancing towards independence.
Trump’s recent aggressive gestures towards Greenland have introduced complexities, but individuals like Aaju Peter remain hopeful that this could invigorate discussions once the tensions ease. Peter, a lawyer who grew up in Greenland and now observes its affairs from Iqaluit across the Davis Strait, emphasized that work towards independence is ongoing, with a current focus on collaboration with Denmark to present a unified front.
The U.S.’s military interests in Greenland are not novel, rooted in a treaty signed in 1941 during Denmark’s occupation by Nazi Germany, granting the U.S. military access to safeguard Greenland. Subsequently, in 1951, the pact was updated under NATO, enabling the U.S. to operate military bases on the island amidst concerns of Soviet threats. Throughout the Cold War, the U.S. maintained numerous military installations in Greenland, now reduced to a single operational facility.
Sara Olsvig, chair of the Inuit Circumpolar Council based in Nuuk, Greenland, underscored the pragmatic approach of Greenlanders towards the necessity of a robust defense alliance. She highlighted the significance Greenlanders place on upholding international law, democratic principles, and human rights, alongside standing with western NATO allies. Olsvig emphasized that the paramount threat to Greenland’s security lies in global challenges like climate change, necessitating global cooperation.
Looking ahead, Williamson stressed the imperative of prioritizing the revitalization of the Greenlandic language, emphasizing its preservation amidst evolving governance structures. Greenland faces several potential paths, including full independence with its constitution, transitioning from autonomy under Denmark’s constitution. However, a United Nations analysis raises concerns about the viability of immediate independence, given the need for Greenland to substantially boost revenues to offset the loss of Danish subsidies, despite possessing abundant natural resources.
Apart from independence, another model under consideration is the free association approach, where a larger state, presumably Denmark, would retain specific powers temporarily as Greenland moves towards economic self-sufficiency. Olsvig believes that Greenland’s politicians currently aim to maintain a cooperative relationship with Denmark, aspiring for independence within an alliance framework.