Analysis of: Danish PM says US ‘ambition to take over Greenland’ is intact after Washington meeting – Europe live
The Guardian | January 15, 2026
The escalating tensions over Greenland expose a fundamental contradiction of capitalist development: the climate crisis, generated by decades of fossil fuel-driven accumulation, is now melting Arctic ice and creating new frontiers for resource extraction and strategic competition. Trump's open discussion of acquiring Greenland—whether through purchase or force—represents not mere diplomatic bluster but the naked logic of imperialist expansion in an era of intensifying inter-capitalist rivalry. The article reveals how climate catastrophe has transformed Greenland from a peripheral territory into a critical node of geopolitical competition. Rare earth deposits, newly accessible shipping routes, and strategic military positioning drive this scramble, with the United States, Russia, and European powers all maneuvering for advantage. The rapid deployment of French, Danish, and allied military forces to Greenland—barely disguised as defensive exercises—demonstrates how capitalist states will mobilize military resources to secure access to valuable commodities and chokepoints, even against nominal allies. Notably absent from this great power maneuvering are the Greenlandic people themselves, whose prime minister must assert that his territory is 'not for sale' while watching foreign militaries arrive on his shores. The Danish and Greenlandic populations, like the Ukrainian people caught between competing powers, become objects rather than subjects of history in this imperial calculus. The contradiction between democratic rhetoric and colonial practice remains unresolved, as Western powers who condemn Russian aggression simultaneously discuss the forcible acquisition of an ally's territory.
Class Dynamics
Actors: US ruling class and state apparatus (Trump administration), European capitalist states (Denmark, France, Poland), Russian state and oligarchic class, Greenlandic political elite (semi-autonomous government), NATO military-industrial complex, Extractive capital (rare earth mining interests), Greenlandic indigenous population, European working classes (energy consumers, taxpayers)
Beneficiaries: Defense contractors and military-industrial corporations, Rare earth and mineral extraction companies, Shipping and logistics capital positioned for Arctic routes, US strategic interests seeking resource control, European arms manufacturers responding to rearmament calls
Harmed Parties: Greenlandic indigenous population facing potential loss of self-determination, European and American working classes funding military buildups, Ukrainian civilians caught between great power competition, Global populations bearing climate crisis consequences, Danish taxpayers financing Arctic military operations
The article reveals a hierarchy of imperial power with the US at the apex, openly threatening a NATO ally with territorial acquisition. European powers occupy a subordinate position, scrambling to demonstrate military capability while avoiding direct confrontation with Washington. Greenland, despite nominal autonomy, lacks genuine sovereignty as larger powers determine its fate. Russia is positioned as both threat and justification for Western military buildup, while the actual Greenlandic population remains largely voiceless in decisions about their territory.
Material Conditions
Economic Factors: Rare earth mineral deposits critical for electronics and green technology, Emerging Arctic shipping routes reducing global trade transit times, Strategic military positioning between US and Russia, Climate-driven resource accessibility through ice melt, European energy infrastructure vulnerabilities (cyberattacks on Poland), Defense spending increases across NATO members
The scramble for Greenland reflects the material needs of advanced capitalist production—rare earths are essential for batteries, electronics, and renewable energy technologies. Control over these resources and trade routes determines competitive advantage in the global capitalist system. The military deployments represent state expenditure to secure conditions for future capital accumulation, with defense contractors as immediate beneficiaries. Macron's explicit call for European 'rearmament' signals a shift toward war economy production relations.
Resources at Stake: Rare earth mineral reserves (among world's largest), Arctic shipping lane control, Strategic military positioning, Territorial sovereignty, European energy infrastructure security, Ukrainian territory and resources
Historical Context
Precedents: US purchase of Alaska from Russia (1867), Colonial scramble for Africa (1880s-1914), Monroe Doctrine assertions over Latin America, Previous US attempts to purchase Greenland (1946, 2019), Resource-driven imperial competition preceding World War I
This represents a return to naked territorial expansionism characteristic of classical imperialism, updated for the climate crisis era. The pattern echoes the colonial 'scramble for Africa' where European powers carved up a continent based on resource potential. The simultaneous discussion of Ukraine, Greenland, and European rearmament reflects Lenin's analysis of imperialism as driven by the need to secure resources, markets, and strategic advantage. Climate crisis has created new 'empty' territories (melting ice) that trigger imperial competition, much as technological advances in the 19th century enabled colonial penetration of previously inaccessible regions.
Contradictions
Primary: The Western alliance system, built on rhetorical commitments to sovereignty and international law, faces its most powerful member openly threatening to seize an ally's territory—the same violation it condemns when Russia acts in Ukraine.
Secondary: Climate crisis generated by capitalist accumulation creates conditions for new resource extraction and accumulation, Democratic rhetoric versus colonial practice in Western foreign policy, NATO as 'defensive alliance' versus US using it for offensive territorial ambitions, European dependency on US security umbrella while US threatens European ally, Greenlandic desire for independence from Denmark may be exploited by US for its own imperial aims
These contradictions are unlikely to find stable resolution within the current system. European powers may attempt to build independent military capacity, but remain structurally dependent on US power. Greenland's semi-autonomous status creates space for manipulation by larger powers. The fundamental contradiction between capitalist growth and climate stability will continue generating new resource frontiers and imperial competition. A possible trajectory involves increasing inter-imperialist tensions, potential fracturing of NATO, and continued subordination of small nation sovereignty to great power interests.
Global Interconnections
The Greenland crisis cannot be understood in isolation from the broader reorganization of global capitalism. The simultaneous discussions of Greenland, Ukraine, and European rearmament reveal an integrated imperial strategy where climate crisis, resource competition, and military positioning converge. Trump's statements about Greenland parallel his administration's approach to Ukraine—treating sovereign territories as bargaining chips in great power competition. The Russian cyberattack on Polish energy infrastructure demonstrates how resource systems have become sites of hybrid warfare. Macron's rhetoric about 'new colonialism' and 'destabilizing forces' represents European capital's recognition that the post-WWII order—where US hegemony provided stability for European accumulation—is fracturing. The rapid deployment of European forces to Greenland signals preparation for a more multipolar, conflictual phase of capitalism where access to resources and trade routes will be secured through military presence rather than diplomatic agreement. Working classes globally will bear the costs of this transition through military spending, climate impacts, and the subordination of social needs to imperial competition.
Conclusion
The Arctic scramble demonstrates that climate crisis will not produce international cooperation but intensified imperial competition. For working people, this means increased military spending, higher taxes, and the subordination of climate action to strategic resource acquisition. The contradiction between NATO's democratic rhetoric and US territorial threats may create openings for anti-imperialist movements, but only if they can articulate an alternative to both American and European imperial projects. The Greenlandic independence movement, Ukrainian resistance, and European anti-war sentiment represent potential sites of struggle, though they remain fragmented and vulnerable to co-optation by competing imperial interests. The material stakes—rare earths, shipping routes, military positioning—ensure this competition will intensify as climate impacts accelerate.
Editorial Note: This analysis applies a dialectical materialist framework to news events. It represents one interpretive perspective and should not be considered objective reporting.
AI-Assisted Analysis | Confidence: 91%