An alarm was raised at the level of the European Union, NATO, and Denmark over American plans to seize Greenland following the arrest of the Venezuelan president Nicolas Maduro.
The statement by the American Secretary of State, Marco Rubio, regarding Greenland has triggered strong reactions and doubts, igniting a new discussion around the geopolitical strategies of the United States and their ambitions in the Arctic.
After a closed briefing in the United States Senate, Rubio announced that he will hold a meeting next week (after 12/1) to discuss the issue of Greenland, intensifying concerns about the future of the region and Washington’s strategy toward Denmark and Russia.
In response to a journalist’s question on whether the United States intend to buy Greenland, Rubio stated that this had been Trump’s intention from the outset.
NEW: Secretary Marco Rubio fires back at reporter after reporter while fielding questions, says Trump intends to buy Greenland.
— Collin Rugg (@CollinRugg) January 7, 2026
Reporter: Does the U.S. intend to buy Greenland?
Rubio: That's always been the President's intent from the very beginning.
Reporter: Is the… pic.twitter.com/VXVYXUeLE8
When asked to respond to another question on whether the American government is willing to put NATO itself at risk, Rubio stated characteristically: “The president always retains the option to use military force to defend the United States.”
White House: The United States will annex Greenland - We are stopping aggressive actions by Russia and China
The United States wish to strengthen their strategic position in the Arctic through the full annexation of Greenland, according to statements by the White House spokesperson, Karoline Leavitt.
During a regular press briefing, Leavitt referred to the benefits that the annexation of the island would offer, with the primary objective being the strengthening of American control in the Arctic region.
She emphasized that full control of Greenland would allow the United States to ensure that competitors, such as Russia and China, will not be able to continue their aggressive actions in this critical and strategic region.
As she stated, this would provide significant strategic advantages and would strengthen the position of the United States on the global stage, particularly in the struggle for control of natural resources and shipping routes in the Arctic.
U.S. military aircraft land en masse in Britain
The concentration of American military aircraft at British military bases highlights a new escalation of the United States’ strategic movements on a global level, against the backdrop of recent developments in Venezuela and Greenland, which have caused international concern.
Since Saturday 3/1/2026, several C-17 Globemaster and AC-130J Ghostrider aircraft have been observed landing at RAF bases in England, with flight data and plane spotter reports confirming their presence.
These flights are linked to American military operations, which appear to have received support from Great Britain, as reported by the United Kingdom Ministry of Defence.
The presence of these aircraft follows the seizure of the Russian tanker Bella - 1 on Wednesday 7/1/2026.
Britain stated that it provided “planned operational support,” including bases and other infrastructure, in anticipation of the American operation.
These aircraft landed at several RAF bases, such as RAF Fairford and RAF Mildenhall in Safolk, and it remains unclear whether they were directly involved in the seizure of the tanker.
The arrival of these aircraft in the United Kingdom coincides with movements by the American military in the Atlantic, as it pursued Bella 1, a Russian tanker under American sanctions, a fact that adds another dimension to the already tense relations between the United States, Russia, and other powers in the region.
It is noted that the British government declined to comment on the nature of the operational activities, reinforcing the mystery surrounding the exact mission of these military movements.
The United States’ strategy and the claim over Greenland
Greenland, which constitutes an autonomous territory of Denmark, has for years been of strategic importance to the international political scene, primarily due to its geographical position in the Arctic.
The American side appears to be interested in Greenland not only for its natural resources but also for its strategic position in the Arctic Circle, a region that may acquire even greater importance as the ice melts.
The United States had attempted to buy Greenland during the first term of Donald Trump, causing international upheaval.
Trump himself, after failing to implement the idea of purchasing it, stated in March 2025 that Greenland could be annexed by the United States through political and economic pressure, threatening Denmark with trade tariffs if Copenhagen refused to discuss the possibility.
Although Denmark, through the words of Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen, rejects any claims over Greenland, Washington continues to have strategic interests in the region.
In 1951, the United States and Denmark signed a mutual protection agreement for Greenland, which ensures that the United States assume the defense of the region against external threats.
This agreement remains in force and, according to certain analyses, reinforces the importance of Greenland for the United States, amid rising tensions in the Arctic and the presence of Russia in the region.
International reactions and Russia’s strategy
Russia, as one of the most significant powers in the Arctic, is closely monitoring developments around Greenland and the United States’ strategy.
The region is critical for Moscow due to the natural resources and strategic passages that exist there.
Russia has already strengthened its military presence in the Arctic and continuously invests in the development of its infrastructure in the region.
Although Russia has not made official statements regarding Greenland, Washington’s strategy for the area may provoke tension with Moscow.
Russia considers the Arctic vital for its security and development, and the American presence there is viewed as a strategic threat.
Furthermore, Russia sees the United States’ effort to strengthen their influence in the Arctic and Greenland as an attempt to destabilize its strong presence in the region, affecting the balance of power and geopolitical negotiations.
The strategic importance of Greenland for the United States
Greenland, although an autonomous territory of Denmark, remains of strategic importance for the United States and for Russia, particularly within the framework of the new Cold War taking shape in the Arctic.
With the region concealing large quantities of natural resources, such as oil and natural gas, the American government views Greenland as an attractive opportunity for energy independence, especially at a time when the global energy market is unstable.
In addition, the strategic position of Greenland makes its participation in the American Strategic Defense Zone (MDP) extremely important. Greenland offers strategic bases and capabilities for monitoring and defense against Russia and other strategic threats in the Arctic region, which is becoming increasingly critical due to melting ice and the opening of new maritime routes.
Greenland appears to be at the center of a new international geopolitical game. The United States’ effort to bring it under their influence, whether through diplomatic pressure or through economic and strategic moves, is expected to cause new tensions both in the Arctic region and internationally. Russia, with its strategic presence in the region and its ongoing development, is closely monitoring these developments and is ready to respond to any threats to its sovereignty in the Arctic.
Ultimately, the dispute surrounding Greenland highlights the importance of the region for control of global geopolitical and economic power, with Russia and the United States ready to invest strategically in the area.
The Arctic region, with its dynamics and emerging resources, is emerging as one of the most critical points on the global geopolitical agenda, with Russia and the United States competing for control of it.
Trump will not hesitate to exercise military force
Politico, in its report, refers to the increase in the United States’ military presence in the Arctic and their strategy for protecting their interests in the region.
According to the report, the United States do not rule out the use of military force to achieve their objectives if the situation escalates and reactions arise from other powers in the region, such as Russia or China.
Washington appears to view the Arctic as an economic and strategic powder keg, which is of enormous importance for global power, both because of natural resources and because of its strategic position for navigation.
Specifically, the United States appear to be investing in military technology and infrastructure in the Arctic to ensure their dominance in the region and to deter Russian and Chinese expansion.
Certain officials within the American government do not rule out the possibility of military action to prevent or offset the strategy of their competitors.
The use of military force, however, is a risk that Donald Trump has highlighted in many of his public statements.
Trump has emphasized the value of America’s power in the Arctic region and has repeatedly stated that the United States will act if necessary to defend their interests, potentially even through the use of military force.
Trump challenges the role of NATO
Beyond direct strategic presence in the Arctic, Trump has made statements that challenge the role of NATO in America’s military actions.
Trump stated that if America faced an emergency situation in the Arctic or elsewhere in the world, NATO “probably would not intervene,” implying that the alliance would not be ready to militarily support the United States, even if it were under threat.
This statement by Trump is extremely noteworthy, as it demonstrates the president’s frustration with NATO’s inability to respond immediately to needs and strategic commitments.
Trump appears to believe that America has become excessively dependent on the alliance and that, under conditions of crisis, it will not receive the assistance it expects.
This stance by Trump reflects a broader trend in the United States’ policy, where America prefers to rely on its own forces and to take strategic decisions independently, rather than waiting for the active participation of its allies.
www.bankingnews.gr
Σχόλια αναγνωστών