By John Q. Hosedrinker 
The United States’ interest in Greenland, spurred by President Trump’s statements about national security, has sparked concern among Greenlanders and Inuit advocacy groups. They strongly oppose American influence, citing past experiences with colonization and a desire for self-determination. These groups fear potential U.S. actions, including annexation, and the impact on their safety and sovereignty, especially given Greenland’s small population. Despite these concerns, Greenlandic leaders are open to diplomatic discussions with the U.S. to ensure their self-determination is respected, while the Chinese and Russians reject the claim that they pose a threat to Greenland.
Read the original article here
No such thing as a better colonizer: Inuit emphatically reject U.S. takeover of Greenland.
The specter of a U.S. takeover of Greenland, a prospect that has gained attention in the past, is met with an emphatic rejection from the Inuit people, and for good reason. Greenland currently enjoys significant autonomy under Danish rule, including its own parliament, prime minister, and control over a vast range of internal affairs, even including local criminal law. While Denmark retains sovereignty over key areas like nationality, currency, border control, the military, and the police, the existing arrangement allows for a substantial degree of self-governance. The question then becomes, what happens to that hard-won autonomy when the U.S. takes over?
Given the historical treatment of U.S. “unincorporated territories,” it’s hardly surprising that Greenlanders are wary. The U.S. has a track record of treating strategically important territories more as assets than as communities. The comparison to U.S. territories like American Samoa or Puerto Rico is telling, where residents often lack full constitutional protections and representation in Congress. Consider places like Diego Garcia, where the local population was displaced to make way for a U.S. military base. The chilling effect this prospect has on the Inuit cannot be overstated.
There’s a well-founded fear that a U.S. takeover would represent a “frying pan to the fire” scenario. Many Inuit believe that while perhaps independence was preferable, it would still be a better position than the treatment they would receive under U.S. control. The discontent with Denmark, whatever it may be, would likely be dwarfed by the negative experiences of living under U.S. control. It’s easy to see why the Inuit are grateful for the support they currently receive from Denmark and the broader European Union. This fear is not baseless given the realities of the situation.
Moreover, this is a fear that is reinforced when one considers the data about conditions in U.S. territories. Residents of the U.S. Virgin Islands, for example, face significantly higher rates of violence, unemployment, and incarceration, while earning substantially less money than they would if they lived in Greenland. Given those harsh realities, it is easy to understand why the Inuit would not jump at the prospect of being absorbed by the U.S.
The potential loss of benefits tied to Danish citizenship, such as healthcare, is also a valid concern. The shift of Greenland’s economy, already dependent on Danish support, to a situation where it is even more reliant on U.S. funding is also concerning. There is a strong sense that the U.S. would primarily be interested in Greenland’s strategic value and natural resources, rather than the well-being of its people. The possibility that the Inuit population would eventually be marginalized or displaced is a very real possibility in the minds of the Inuit.
That said, it is also important to acknowledge that Greenland is not fully independent. The nation is largely dependent on the support of Denmark, so there is the ever-present question of how a smaller nation like Greenland could survive on its own financially and militarily. That dependence could become even more pronounced under U.S. rule, where the Inuit would have far less control over their own future. Ultimately, the choice would fall on them to embrace this new relationship.
The fact remains that Greenland has a unique legal and moral history. Both the Inuit and the Nordic people have been in Greenland for hundreds of years. Ideally, the nation could embrace its biculturalism and become a hybrid Arctic-Nordic state. This is especially true given that the Danish rule predates the Inuit, and Greenland is in many ways already a semi-independent country that is capable of entering its own foreign trade agreements. It is essentially the perfect place to exercise autonomy.