greenland

What if the U.S. got Greenland?

Reflections on NATO, European Security, International Law and the Arctic Future

May 22, 2026 / Wien / Global Affairs / European Security and Defence

On 22 May 2026, the AIES, together with the Vienna Institute for Global Studies (VIGS) and the Vienna School of International Studies, organised a public event entitled “What if the U.S. got Greenland? Reflections on NATO, European Security, International Law and the Arctic Future”.

Following welcome remarks by Martin Eichtinger, Director of the Vienna School of International Studies, and opening remarks by Zoltan Acs, Director of the Vienna Institute for Global Studies, Kenneth R. Rosen, independent journalist, war correspondent, and author of Polar War: Submarines, Spies, and the Struggle for Power in a Melting Arctic, delivered the keynote address. The subsequent panel discussion featured Kathrine Bødker, Member of the Executive Council of the Inuit Circumpolar Council in Greenland; Lassi Heininen, Professor em. and expert on Arctic politics from Finland; Jens Wendel-Hansen, Senior Researcher and historian from Denmark; as well as Michael Zinkanell, Director of AIES and moderator of the event.

The discussion highlighted that the Arctic is increasingly becoming a central arena of geopolitical competition. Climate change, melting ice, emerging trade routes, and access to critical raw materials and energy resources are fundamentally reshaping the strategic importance of the region. Against this backdrop, Greenland has attracted growing international attention in recent months. Repeated statements by U.S. President Donald Trump regarding a possible takeover of Greenland have caused significant tensions and triggered debates on territorial sovereignty, alliance solidarity, and the stability of transatlantic relations.

A key topic of the discussion was the question of sovereignty and self-determination. The panellists stressed, particularly from a Greenlandic perspective, that Greenland should not merely be viewed as a geostrategic space or resource-rich territory, but as the homeland of a population with its own history, identity, and political rights. At the same time, it was emphasised that territorial integrity and state sovereignty remain fundamental pillars of the international order. Any challenge to these principles could have far-reaching consequences for smaller states, multilateral institutions, and the European security architecture.

Another important focus was the role of NATO and transatlantic relations. The discussion demonstrated that the debate surrounding Greenland raises not only questions of territorial security, but also exposes broader tensions within Western alliance structures. Speakers further noted that developments in the Arctic could intensify European debates on strategic autonomy, resilience, and future security architectures.

In conclusion, the participants emphasised the importance of multilateral cooperation and existing frameworks for Arctic governance. Institutions such as the Arctic Council were highlighted as important platforms for dialogue, confidence-building, and regional stability. The speakers agreed that long-term stability in the region can only be ensured through cooperation, mutual respect, and adherence to international rules and norms.

What if the U.S. got Greenland?

Reflections on NATO, European Security, International Law and the Arctic Future

Related Events

Cold War 2.0 (?): The Transformation in the International System

Europe's security architecture in a phase of geopolitical upheaval

Trump 2.0., NATO and Europe's Security