Why the United States Must Secure Control of Greenland: A Matter of National Survival

Eric Perrine
Jan 19
4 min read

Updated: Jan 20

In an era of escalating global tensions, President Donald Trump's renewed push to acquire Greenland has reignited debates over America's role in the Arctic. Far from a whimsical land grab, this initiative is rooted in profound strategic imperatives for U.S. safety and security. Conservative commentator Glenn Beck has been a vocal proponent, framing Greenland as essential to countering an emerging "Axis" of adversaries including China, Russia, and Iran. Drawing from Beck's insights and corroborated by military experts, historical precedents, and geopolitical analyses, this article explores why U.S. control of Greenland is not just advantageous but necessary. From military deterrence to resource dominance, Greenland represents a linchpin in safeguarding American interests against rising threats.

Historical Precedent: America's Long-Standing Stake in Greenland

The United States' interest in Greenland dates back to World War II, when the island's strategic position became evident. In 1941, the U.S. established bases there to prevent Nazi Germany from using it as a staging ground for attacks on North America and Allied shipping lanes. Post-war, during the Cold War, Greenland hosted key installations like Thule Air Base (now Pituffik Space Base), which served as a frontline defense against Soviet incursions. President Harry Truman even offered Denmark $100 million in gold to purchase the island in 1946, recognizing its value for continental defense.

Glenn Beck echoes this history, noting in a January 2025 broadcast that the U.S. has maintained a military presence in Greenland since WWII, becoming its defender in 1951. In his view, Trump's proposal isn't novel but a continuation of prudent American strategy. Beck argues that without enhanced U.S. control, adversaries like Russia and China could exploit the island, turning a historical ally into a vulnerability. As Beck stated in a recent post, "If Trump doesn't step up America's involvement in Greenland, there are 2 very eager customers - Russia and China - who will."

This historical lens underscores Greenland's enduring role: a shield for North America. Today, the island's importance has only grown, opening new shipping routes and exposing vast resources.

Glenn Beck's Case: Countering a New Axis of Evil

Glenn Beck has been one of the most articulate advocates for U.S. acquisition of Greenland, framing it as a defensive necessity against a modern "Axis" of threats. In a January 2026 video, Beck declared, "Here's why Trump NEEDS Greenland: He isn’t building an ‘empire.’ He’s gathering a new Allied Powers against an Axis of China, Russia, Iran, and possibly... a nuclear-armed Islamist caliphate called Europe." Beck warns that NATO's ineffectiveness leaves Greenland vulnerable; if Denmark falls under radical influences, adversaries could be "at our doorstep."

Beck emphasizes Greenland's strategic location and resources as buffers against digital, currency, and hot wars with China. In an exclusive interview with Charlie Kirk, who visited Greenland with Donald Trump Jr., Beck highlighted local support: "We were met by hundreds of people in MAGA hats... People that love America and WANT TO BE PART of America." Kirk, echoing Beck, argued that acquiring Greenland "would exponentially benefit the United States," especially amid China's rise.

Beck also ties Greenland to broader territorial strategies, like regaining the Panama Canal, to strengthen the Western Hemisphere. In his view, this isn't imperialism but preparation for survival: "Acquiring Greenland’s strategic location and natural resources, even as a protectorate, would GREATLY help America prepare for any eventuality." Beck's rhetoric aligns with conservative values of proactive defense, rejecting globalist complacency.

Military Imperatives: The Arctic Frontline

Beyond Beck's advocacy, military analysts affirm Greenland's criticality. Situated in the GIUK Gap (Greenland-Iceland-UK), the island controls access to the North Atlantic, vital for monitoring Russian submarines and missiles. Pituffik Space Base provides missile detection, space surveillance, and early warning—essential for deterring nuclear threats. As the Arctic warms, new routes like the Northwest Passage emerge, shortening Asia-Europe transit by 7,000 km compared to the Panama Canal. U.S. control would secure these lanes, preventing Russian or Chinese dominance.

Russia's Arctic buildup—bases on the Kola Peninsula and "bastion" defenses—threatens U.S. interests. China, via its "Polar Silk Road," seeks influence through investments. Trump has echoed this: "The World is not secure unless we have Complete and Total Control of Greenland." Without it, adversaries could establish footholds, undermining NATO and exposing North America.

Beck reinforces this: "Our bases there are still deterrents against Russia." Enhanced U.S. presence would enable anti-submarine warfare and sensor networks, bolstering homeland defense.

Economic and Resource Security: Breaking China's Grip

Greenland's subsoil riches—rare earth minerals, oil, gas—offer economic leverage. It holds 43 of 50 U.S.-designated critical minerals, vital for batteries, EVs, and military tech. The U.S. relies on China for 80% of rare earths; Greenland could reduce this dependency. Oil reserves may exceed 52 billion barrels.

Beck highlights: "Massive deposits of crucial resources in our backyard." U.S. control would secure supply chains, countering China's economic warfare.

Addressing Counterarguments: Sovereignty and Alliances

Critics, like Rep. Michael McCaul, warn invasion could invoke NATO's Article 5, risking alliance collapse. Denmark rejects force, but Beck and Trump propose purchase or protectorate, citing local sentiment. With NATO's perceived weaknesses, Beck argues U.S. leadership is essential.

Conclusion: A Bold Step for American Security

Greenland's control is imperative for U.S. survival amid great-power competition. As Beck warns, inaction invites adversaries. By securing this Arctic bastion, America can fortify defenses, harness resources, and lead a resilient alliance. The time to act is now—before the ice melts and opportunities freeze over.