‘It’s very unpredictable’: divided Greenland prepares to vote amid Trump-inspired existential crisis

 

Amid growing pro-independence sentiments and international attention, Greenland’s upcoming election could be one of the most consequential in its history. While issues like schools, healthcare, and independence dominate the agenda, Greenlandic politician Aaja Chemnitz Larsen notes that what truly sets this election apart is the global spotlight. “We’re seeing influence from the US, Denmark, and other places. It is not the same as other elections,” she says.

The heightened attention stems largely from former US President Donald Trump’s controversial interest in purchasing Greenland. His repeated suggestions of acquiring the Arctic island, even mentioning potential military action and tariffs if Denmark resisted, have brought unprecedented focus to Greenland’s political landscape. Denmark, which ruled Greenland as a colony until 1953 and still manages its foreign and security policies, is also closely monitoring the situation to maintain its hold on this strategic territory.

The election’s outcome remains uncertain, with little polling data available. Prime Minister Múte Egede’s ruling party, Inuit Ataqatigiit, which supports democratic socialism and independence, faces a challenge from Naleraq, Greenland’s largest opposition party. Naleraq’s strong stance on independence and its openness to US collaboration have gained traction among voters.

Adding to the election’s complexity is a surge in public discontent following a Danish documentary alleging Denmark profited as much as 400 billion Danish kroner (£45bn) from a Greenlandic cryolite mine between 1854 and 1987. Despite disputes over the accuracy of these figures, many Greenlanders see it as another example of colonial exploitation. A poll conducted by Greenlandic newspaper Sermitsiaq found that over a third of voters said the documentary’s findings would influence their vote.

The election also comes amid recent controversies surrounding Denmark’s treatment of Greenlanders, including an IUD scandal where 4,500 women and girls were allegedly given contraception without consent from 1966 to 1970. Prime Minister Egede labeled the scandal a genocide, and Denmark has reversed controversial policies that led to Inuit children being separated from their families.

With only about 40,000 eligible voters, the election could be decided by narrow margins. Unlike the crisis-mode reaction in Copenhagen, many in Greenland’s capital, Nuuk, view Trump’s interest with a mix of skepticism and opportunity, hoping it might help negotiate a better deal with Denmark or accelerate independence.

Rasmus Leander Nielsen, from the University of Greenland’s center for foreign and security policy, describes the election as a clash of everyday politics and global geopolitical questions. He anticipates a potential referendum on independence within the next election cycle but believes true independence could take a decade or longer, akin to the lengthy Brexit process.

Aki-Matilda Høegh-Dam, a Greenlandic politician now running with Naleraq, emphasizes the urgency for Greenland to assert itself on the global stage. “With major interest from the outside world, it’s more important now to have leaders skilled in foreign policy,” she says.

The interest extends beyond politics to the business world. Drew Horn, former member of Trump’s administration and CEO of GreenMet, a US-based mineral investment company, claims that “tens of billions” of dollars are ready to flow into Greenland’s economy. Former Arctic commissioner Tom Dans echoes this optimism, describing Greenland as a frontier market with exciting opportunities, noting its proximity to New York City as a significant advantage.

As the world watches, Greenland’s election is shaping up to be a pivotal moment, balancing local needs with global interests and long-standing colonial dynamics with aspirations for independence.