Forget Greenland. Worry About Alaska
For decades, the idea of the United States acquiring Greenland has floated around Washington D.C., most recently sparking controversy under the previous administration. While the focus was on Greenland, a critical element was often overlooked: the strategic and economic importance of Alaska. Now, with a renewed emphasis on the Arctic, it’s time to shift the conversation and focus on bolstering Alaska’s position, not trading it away.
A History of Considering Trades
The notion of a U.S.-Denmark land swap isn’t new. As far back as the 1940s, State Department officials explored the possibility of trading parts of Alaska for parts of Greenland. This idea resurfaced in 1867, alongside the purchase of Alaska from Russia, with discussions about also acquiring Greenland and Iceland. While these talks never materialized, they highlight a long-standing, if intermittent, interest in the Danish territory.
The Trump Era and Recent Reassurance Efforts
Recent years saw a resurgence of interest in Greenland, fueled by former President Trump’s expressed desire to acquire the island. These overtures caused significant anxiety in Greenland and strained relations with Denmark. Senator Lisa Murkowski led a bipartisan delegation to Greenland in February 2026, aiming to rebuild trust eroded by these threats. Murkowski acknowledged the damage done, stating that decades of trust built since World War II had been degraded.
Alaska’s Strategic and Economic Importance
Alaska’s value extends far beyond its size – roughly 2.5 times that of Texas. While Greenland is larger in total area (836,000 square miles compared to Alaska’s size), Alaska’s established infrastructure, resource potential, and existing population make it a far more valuable asset. Unlike Greenland, Alaska possesses significant critical mineral potential that has already been mapped and quantified.
The Trans-Arctic Alliance
Senator Murkowski is championing a “trans-Arctic alliance,” recognizing the growing importance of the region. This initiative aims to strengthen relationships with Arctic nations, including Greenland, but crucially, it prioritizes Alaska’s role as a key strategic partner. The focus is on collaboration and mutual benefit, rather than acquisition.
Inuit Connections and Shared Futures
Both Alaska and Greenland share a strong cultural connection through their Inuit populations. Recognizing and supporting the needs and perspectives of these communities is vital for any future Arctic policy. Both regions face similar challenges related to climate change, resource management, and economic development.
FAQ
Q: Why was the U.S. Interested in Greenland?
A: Historically, the U.S. Has been interested in Greenland due to its strategic location and potential resources.
Q: What is Senator Murkowski’s role in this?
A: Senator Murkowski is leading efforts to rebuild trust with Greenland and strengthen the U.S.’s position in the Arctic, prioritizing Alaska’s role.
Q: Is the idea of the U.S. Buying Greenland completely off the table?
A: While the previous administration’s overtures have subsided, Senator King stated that they cannot guarantee the president won’t change his mind.
The future of the Arctic hinges on a stable and prosperous Alaska. Investing in Alaska’s infrastructure, supporting its communities, and recognizing its strategic importance are far more beneficial than pursuing the uncertain and potentially destabilizing path of acquiring Greenland. The focus must be on strengthening what we have, not chasing what we don’t.
Explore Further: Read more about Alaska’s history and its role in the Arctic here.
Join the Conversation: What are your thoughts on the future of the Arctic? Share your comments below!
