Maribne Duc. Mikael hertig fotto
Marine Duc (31) wrote her thesis at Université Bordeaux Montaigne and is now a PhD and postdoc at the University of Reims.
Marine Duc: Trump’s ambitions for Greenland are changing Danish policy and Greenlandic nationalism
Anti-colonial movements in the 1970s led to Greenland’s first home rule in 1979, and thirty years later to the expanded self-government (Selvstyre), which has been in effect since 2009. A real program to build a state is underway.
Trump’s ambitions for the Arctic island are influencing Denmark’s policy toward the Inuit population and the expressions of Greenlandic nationalism, explains the researcher in an interview with Le Monde.
Marine Duc is a geographer, Greenland specialist, and lecturer at the University of Reims, where she studies postcolonial power relations between the Greenlandic population and Denmark. She has worked on issues including inequality in education and gender, as well as mining policies in Greenland.
Greenlandic reaction to Trump’s annexation plans
The situation has evolved since Donald Trump’s first demand a year ago. In January 2025, the US president might have hoped for support from part of the population due to inflamed anti-Danish sentiments in Greenland in recent years. That is no longer the case today. In Greenland, there is now only a very small minority that is positive toward Trump’s actions, and the president’s repeated statements are causing anxiety among the population.
The rare “neither… nor” position
“If we have to choose between the USA and Denmark right now, we choose Denmark.”
The “neither… nor” position taken by Greenlandic leaders, many activists, and civil society members is clear: They want to be neither Danish nor American; they are Greenlanders, and the agreements (the self-government act) from 2009 fully recognize their right to self-determination. Trump’s ambitions appear to have the effect of transforming expressions of Greenlandic nationalism by triggering manifestations of national unity across parties—as seen in the joint declaration from the five Greenlandic political parties on January 9. This unity is quite rare in Greenland’s political history.
Since then, Greenland’s government leader, Jens-Frederik Nielsen, clarified on January 13: “If we have to choose between the USA and Denmark right now, we choose Denmark.” Although the status quo with Denmark remains unsatisfactory for many Greenlanders, they rely on the Danish state to preserve the island’s security and the principles of international law.
Expressions of anti-Danish sentiment
You mention an inflamed anti-Danish mood in recent years. How does it manifest?
-Trump’s predatory demand occurs during a special period for Greenland. Criticism of violence during colonial times has gained widespread traction in the population in recent years, especially with the revelation of several scandals, including those involving forced sterilizations (the IUD campaign, forced removals).
Between 1960 and 1970, Danish authorities conducted an extensive contraception campaign in Greenland. Thousands of women, some as young as 14 or 15, had IUDs inserted without their consent. They suffered pain, infections, and involuntary infertility without understanding the cause. The scandal only truly emerged in 2022 and has since been confirmed by scientific studies.
The Danish government consciously created ignorance and acknowledged its responsibility very late. When it happened in September 2025, they involved Greenlandic authorities in the apologies, which blurred the line between perpetrators and victims. It is estimated that 4,500 women were affected, which at the time was half of all Greenlandic women of childbearing age. This gender- and race-based violence violates reproductive rights and thus human rights. It could potentially qualify as “genocide” under the Geneva Conventions’ criteria (though a closer legal interpretation points more toward “crimes against humanity,” as the Danish intent was not to exterminate the Greenlandic population).
Context of this violence
In what context did this violence occur?
– Greenland was colonized in the 18th century by the Kingdom of Denmark-Norway, originally to find descendants of the Norse from Erik the Red’s Viking era in the 10th century, who established the first European settlement on the island. From the 19th century, the colonial project rested on economic interests tied to trade in hunting products—furs and skins, seal and whale oil—as well as mineral extraction. It was supplemented by policies to regulate racial differences and ensure political dominance.
The Danish historian Søren Rud has shown that in the 19th century, trade in hunting products was linked to a deliberate maintenance of the Inuit population in a “natural” state deemed suitable for them.
The 1950s marked a turning point in the colonization process. In 1953, Greenland lost its colonial status and became a full Danish county. [This was a condition for Denmark’s admission to the UN.] Greenlanders were to be made into Danes. Therefore, Denmark invested massively in education, health, the fishing industry, and the closure of villages to concentrate the population under the pretext of “modernization.” Other values were adapted: Danish as the legitimate language, the nuclear family, rent, and wage labor.
Consequences of these policies: Colonial trauma
These changes in lifestyle have had serious consequences for body and mind. The social sciences speak of “colonial trauma” for the rise in alcoholism, suicide, gender-based violence, and violence against children, as well as their inheritance to subsequent generations.
These changes have also reinforced Greenland’s economic dependence on Denmark, which today is used as an argument against independence.
The generations that directly experienced these policies are aging, but memories of colonial violence live on and influence the ongoing geopolitical upheavals: Greenlanders know colonialism’s realities from the inside and recognize colonial motives of violence toward their land.
The narrative of the good colonial power
– How has the perception of these acts of violence evolved in Denmark?
The media and anti-colonial and feminist activist circles have played a key role in the topic. There are also signs of growing awareness in Denmark, for example through collective mobilizations.
Nevertheless, the narrative of the “good colonial power” persists, and Danish authorities try to maintain it, even as it crumbles after the revelations.
Trump’s imperialism has already influenced Danish policy toward the Inuit: In January 2025, the government dropped parental competency test investigations (tests d’évaluation des compétences parentales), which human rights advocates called culturally biased—they led to Greenlandic children in Denmark being placed in foster care seven times more often than Danish children. The government’s public apology in September 2025 to the women from the IUD campaign can be seen as an attempt to ease tensions with Greenlanders amid Trump’s maneuvers.
Territory versus population
What role do the territory’s resources play in the geopolitical dynamics?
Denmark’s colonization of Greenland was economically driven from the start. From the late 19th century until the 1980s, Danes extracted cryolite—a rare material essential for aluminum production. The documentary Orsugiak, l’or blanc du Groenland (2025) by Claus Pilehave and Otto Rosing, which attempted to calculate the enormous profits, was selected by Danish public service after heated debate, showing how sensitive the topic still is.
Since 2009, the Greenlandic government owns its subsoil resources. The large deposits under the inland ice—especially rare earth elements critical for the digital industry—are difficult to extract, and the country still seeks foreign investment. Nothing prevents American companies from investing, as long as they comply with socio-environmental regulations.
Macron’s speech on Trump’s “neocolonial aggression”
Emmanuel Macron has spoken of Donald Trump’s “neocolonial aggression” toward Europe in connection with Greenland. How do you assess this reaction?
– -This speech naturalizes Greenland’s affiliation with the EU. But Greenland’s European identity is unstable and uncertain. Administratively, Greenland was an EU member via Denmark but left voluntarily in 1985 after a referendum due to disagreements over fisheries.
Since the 2010s, closer ties to the EU have emerged regarding fishing rights and new partnerships, e.g., educational ones. A 2024 poll shows that 60% of Greenlanders are now supporters of EU membership. But the EU is barely mentioned in Greenland’s security and defense document from February 2024 (2024-2033).
Perspectives may be changing with NATO and EU’s joint security policy, but Greenlandic national sentiment is built in opposition to Europeanness. The idea that Greenlanders are not “real” Europeans persists as a source of stigmatization of Inuit in the Danish realm. Macron forgets that Greenland is first and foremost a European colonial project—like the Caribbean, Africa, or the Pacific.