Trump stated that Greenland must be captured, intelligence personnel have already infiltrated in advance, and he has ordered the military to formulate a plan for seizing it.

Key Chapter Title List

1. The Evolution of the Trump Administration's Path on Greenland: From Verbal Provocation to Multi-Track Layout
2. The Intense Political Game and Power Checks and Balances in the United States
3. Intelligence Activities and Strategic Preparations at the Covert Level
4. Strong International Opposition and the Fracturing of Alliance Relations
5. Impact Assessment on China and Strategic Response Recommendations
6. References

Document Introduction

This report aims to conduct an in-depth analysis of a series of radical strategic intentions and actions by the U.S. Trump administration regarding Greenland from 2025 to early 2026. These actions have evolved from isolated geopolitical rhetoric into a major event profoundly disrupting the security and resource landscape of the Arctic and even the world. The core manifestation is the U.S. President's public declaration that the United States must possess Greenland to prevent control by China and Russia, vowing to take action regardless of Greenland's wishes. This move not only exposes the radical tendencies of U.S. unilateralist thinking but also directly impacts the foundation of mutual trust with traditional allies. It may reshape critical mineral supply chains and the Arctic security architecture, posing complex implications for China's related interests.

The report first systematically outlines the evolution of the Trump administration's strategic path on Greenland, revealing its progression from verbal economic inducements to a multi-track layout involving military deterrence and diplomatic pressure. Specific manifestations include the gradual escalation and hardening of strategic statements, synchronized adjustments in military and security deployments (such as transferring Greenland's military responsibility from European Command to Northern Command and leveraging the Pituffik Space Base to strengthen forward presence), and the use of comprehensive means such as diplomatic appointments (e.g., appointing a U.S. Special Envoy for Greenland) and economic inducements. This series of actions demonstrates the U.S. attempt to strengthen control over the region and preemptively secure key mineral resources through a hybrid strategy.

Secondly, the report analyzes the intense domestic political game and checks and balances in the United States surrounding this issue. Senior military officials hold reservations or even publicly resist extreme military measures, with reports indicating that the military viewed demands to formulate invasion plans as insane and illegal and refused them. Congress shows a rare bipartisan stance of legislative constraint, with splits emerging within the Republican Party, while Democrats warn that such actions could trigger NATO treaty obligations, leading to confrontation between the U.S. and its European allies. Furthermore, U.S. public opinion widely questions the plan, with extreme voices on social media even calling for the purge of opposing generals, highlighting the profound domestic divisions and risks of political turmoil triggered by this matter.

At the covert action level, the report notes that the United States has been accused of intensifying intelligence-gathering activities in Greenland, even deploying personnel linked to political figures for infiltration, attempting to interfere in Greenland's internal affairs through informal channels. This has already prompted diplomatic protests from Denmark. Simultaneously, the U.S. has strengthened its forward military base, the Pituffik Space Base in Greenland, and replaced commanders whose policy stances were inconsistent with the base's, indicating preparations for a potential long-term strategic presence.

Regarding international reactions, the report details the strong opposition from Denmark, the Greenland Self-Government, the European Union, and NATO. The Danish Prime Minister warned that a U.S. military attack would lead to the dissolution of NATO. Greenland's five major political parties issued a joint statement firmly opposing annexation by the United States. The EU and NATO have shown collective support for Danish and Greenlandic sovereignty and the right to self-determination, explicitly opposing unilateral U.S. action and considering responses through enhanced multilateral Arctic security cooperation. Russia, amidst this geopolitical upheaval, has adopted a posture of strategic observation, closely monitoring the deepening U.S.-Europe contradictions.

Finally, based on the above analysis, the report assesses the potential impact of this event on China and proposes directions for strategic response considerations. The content of this report is primarily based on publicly available media reports, government statements, social media information, and open literature from 2025 to early 2026. It aims to provide decision-makers and researchers in related fields with systematic background analysis and decision-making reference based on the development of events.