Trump on Greenland Deal: ‘It’s Essentially Total Access’
“We’re going to have total access to Greenland. We’re going to have all military access that we want.”
President Donald Trump dropped a few more hints about the Greenland deal and the Arctic.
Trump spoke to Fox Business:
BARTIROMO: So what are we talking about? An acquisition of Greenland. Are you going to pay for it?
TRUMP: I mean, we’re talking about, it’s really being negotiated now, the details of it, but essentially it’s total access. It’s, there’s no end, there’s no time limit. We’re not doing a 99 or 10 year or anything else. You know, the famous 99 year deals that you hear about because countries can’t do it for that countries go on longer. And so I think it’s going to be something that’s very well. Already it’s being reviewed very well. Well, I noticed the stock market went up very substantially after we announced it, but the details are being negotiated now. It’ll be very good.
BARTIROMO: So because the GDP of Greenland is like $3.3 billion but people are valuing Greenland and between 50 billion and almost a trillion. So what are you willing to pay for Greenland?
TRUMP: Well, I’m not going to have to pay anything. We’re going to have total access to Greenland. We’re going to have all military access that we want. We’re going to be able to put what we need on Greenland because we want it. We’re talking about national security and international security. So we’re going to not have to pay anything other than the fact that we are building the golden dome. And the golden dome is going to be something that’s going to be very amazing. It’ll be Israel times, probably 100 and we need it. I think we need it, and it’s all going to be made in the United States.
.@POTUS on the Greenland framework: "Essentially, it’s total access. There’s no end — there’s no time limit…
We're going to have all military access that we want… We’re going to not have to pay anything, other than the fact that we are building the Golden Dome." pic.twitter.com/U6cWEsQToo
— Rapid Response 47 (@RapidResponse47) January 22, 2026
I’ve seen leaks about the deal on X, but I won’t report on them until we hear from the administration, especially since Trump said they’re still hammering out the details.
In other words, we do not know for sure what the Trump administration negotiated with NATO.
But we do know that Trump wants access to Greenland for national security:
TRUMP: But in the meantime, we’re getting everything we wanted, total security, total access to everything. Have as many bases, have all the equipment that we want. And very importantly, you know, we’re building the golden dome, we call it. It was called the Iron Dome. Somehow the golden dome sounded a little bit better. But we have a technology that’s second down, and you saw what we did with Israel, then that’s our genius that did that. And it’s amazing. It’s just, you know, it’s foolproof, and we’re going to be building it, and it works much better when we have access to Greenland. Just covers more territory, covers it more accurately. Missiles will be more accurate by having, it’s very important strategically as a piece, and we will have all everything we want. We’re getting everything we want at no cost.
BARTIROMO: So the so the golden dome will be on Greenland?
TRUMP: A piece of it, yes, and it’s a very important part, because it’s, everything comes over Greenland. If the bad guys start shooting, it comes over Greenland. So we knock it down. It’s pretty infallible. It’s amazing. You know, Ronald Reagan had the idea a long time ago, but we didn’t have any technology at that point. The concept was great, but there was no technology. Now we have unbelievable technology. I mean, virtually 100%.
.@POTUS says Greenland will play "a very important part" of the Golden Dome defense system: "Everything comes over Greenland. If the bad guys start shooting, it comes over Greenland, so we knock it down." pic.twitter.com/a62Gz0an87
— Rapid Response 47 (@RapidResponse47) January 22, 2026
I mentioned President Ronald Reagan’s Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI) in my previous post.
Reagan proposed the idea in 1983 during the Cold War when people thought Russia would go nuclear on America.
Trump’s correct when he said we didn’t have the technology at that time, but the panicans also got in the way.
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
What about the supposed rare earths and other economic resources in Greenland? Wasn’t that supposedly important as well?
It is, but we don’t need to buy the island in order to be able to then buy the minerals. We can buy them from whoever mines them. The important part is that the Chinese and Russians don’t have them.
Global warming, if that is even real, might or might not make mining for “rare earth minerals” economically feasible. In that event, any US mining company could do long term lease for mining there, just like they do in other countries. Its not necessary to own greenland for that.
I’d like to understand how this differs from the treaty we signed with Denmark over 75 years ago.
What I;m curious about is did Greenland agree. They could get independence from Denmark and would that affect anything.
It’s not up to Greenland as they are a colony of the Danes! We know this because suddenly the left is in favour of overseas European colonial empires 🤣
They could get independence from Denmark, by popular vote of Greenland residents. After that Greenland could apply to be part of EU and would probably be accepted. Greenland could then try to negotiate its own separate mutual defense agreement with Canada or Britain. but no guarantee it would be better deal for them.
If Greenland joins the EU they will not be able to negotiate their own trade or defence or any kind of deals because they are part of the EU.
You might know more about EU than me.
But I pulled this from AI:
“EU member states can and do have separate defense treaties. While all EU countries are bound by the EU’s own mutual defense clause, they maintain the sovereign right to enter into separate bilateral or multilateral military alliances.”
I just read an article about it. Maybe linked from Insta? I don’t remember. The article in summary said that our deal is we provide defense but they are sovereign. The author said this means in the past – in the cold war – we had one opponent and if they came to use we know where they are coming from. And they are not building bases up the street from us. That model worked until the Iron Curtain fell. Now it is Russia and China, the Arctic seaways are opening up and both are looking to claim the Arctic. We need a way to ensure they do not take Greenland or set up nearby (like say a Monroe Doctrine).
The problem is we agreed – according to the author – to provide defense BUT they continued to be sovereign which means they could change their mind or put restrictions on what we did at any time. In the 1950’s until the Iron Curtain fell – there was no concern that they would invite in the Soviets. Now however with China’s expansionist policies, building airports and naval ports in strategically important countries – there is concern they could do the same with Greenland. In fact Greenland met with China about building airports in Greenland. Because under the agreement Greenland is sovereign they could tell USA to leave or put restrictions as to how we provide defense (like Biden put restrictions on how Israel could fight Hamas, which was “you can’t actually fight where they are.”).
So the agreement it sounds like was a Gentleman’s agreement where Greenland could simply change its mind. That’s the gist of what I took from the article.
If you read all the people commenting “why not just keep the previous agreement,” I’ve not seen anyone actually state what the details of that agreement are.
we already paid for greenland and all that european dependency
like we have already given reparations to blmplo here but lefty keeps playing games
maga
Not to be confused with Green Day…
The NFL stands for NOT FOR LONG
Go woke Go broke
I havent watched for decades now other than some SB party invitees
and they may in fact go broke one day >>lose major popularity
but after all they have done bad?? and they are a huge business ,,its going to have to take something ,,,to stop the thugg lovefest
Mining or not, this proposal obviously blocks China from clawing its way into our sphere of security.
Trump better be quick about building infrastructure since the democrats will defund it given the opportunity; Obama blocking missile defense installations in Poland and Czechoslovakia.
Yes. A lot of things, by lot I mean EVERYTHING needs to be set in stone before Democrats get anywhere near the wheels of power.
Primary threat is Russia. They could over-run Greenland in 24 hours. Greenland only has police force for self defense.
China made some noise about new “northwest passage” but that route would hinge on “global warming” and “climate change” and unpredictable factors.
No, the US contribution was the money, not the genius. And the Iron Dome is very far from foolproof. It’s good, but a lot gets past it. The Iranian attack did a lot of damage, far more than was allowed to be publicized at the time, and the fact that the casualty count was so low was God’s doing, not the technology’s. So many buildings were hit without anyone being killed, buildings that had been evacuated on a hunch, buildings were everyone somehow survived, it’s not something that is statistically likely, or can be relied on to happen again, let alone anywhere outside the “land on which God’s eyes are, from the beginning of the year to the end of the year”.
Like any defense it can be saturated.
Part of the technology is to not engage incoming warheads that it thinks are not a problem (like it will land in an empty field). I wonder how susceptible it is to being tricked by drones or maneuverable warheads. Any list of failures would be interesting to see and of course unavailable,
Greenland only has 57k residents. It wouldn’t take much effort for 51% voters to ram thru new or different policy that upends the security arrangement as the political winds shift in the future. They might decide they want to go their own way like New Zealand for example. There must be way for USA to retain control of any bases, or its not worth it for the USA.
On the other hand, I can understand how Greenlanders might not ever want to become part of the USA, and live under american laws, and thereby open the door to the problems that plague american culture: fentanyl epidemic, mass shootings, uncontrolled immigration, etc.