A Greenland independence icon has reversed his stance amid rising US interest, prompting political realignment and heated debate about sovereignty and security.
NUUK, Greenland – Aqqaluk Lynge, Greenland’s champion of independence, has undergone a radical conversion.
Half a century ago, an Inuit activist and poet was a co-founder of one of the island’s largest independence parties, urging his fellow Inuit to separate from Denmark, which he described as exploitative colonial domination.
«Їх потрібно прибрати. Ми більше не заплатимо ціну», – він написав у вірши 1975 року. «Страждання не може бути зменшене розрадою. Гноблення – це те, з чим треба боротися»
“They must be removed. We will no longer pay the price,” he wrote in a 1975 poem. “Suffering cannot be diminished by consolation. Oppression is something to fight against.”
– Aqqaluk Lynge
However, Greenland is now facing what he views as a much greater threat: U.S. President Donald Trump, who repeatedly pressed for control over the vast Arctic island, citing national security. As a result, Lynge said he now believes his homeland should forever remain part of the Kingdom of Denmark, which he sees as a shield against American aggression.
“We feel betrayed by the United States,” said the 78-year-old Lynge during an interview near the capital Nuuk, from whose window he could see chunks of ice in the neighboring fjord.
Lynge is not alone in such a reaction. The comments from the U.S. president triggered a large-scale response that is now reshaping Greenland’s politics – similar to how in Canada a wave of patriotic anger over rhetoric about the “51st state” of the United States helped bring the Canadian coalition to power last year.
For many years, Greenland’s politics were dominated by independence parties. At present the government is led by a party that refuses to discuss independence in the near term and supports a gradual path toward possible secession. Even government ministers who were previously supportive of independence have shifted their position in recent months.
“Our dream is self-determination, but now we must protect the future,” said Múte Egede, Greenland’s foreign minister, Reuters reported. “If the United States takes us away, the dream of self-determination will disappear forever.”
This is a shock for Greenland. Politics here for many years has lived under the shadow of dissatisfaction with Denmark’s colonial past, which colonized the island for centuries and still controls its foreign policy and defense. In the 1960s and 1970s Denmark began to administer contraceptives to thousands of Inuit women and girls, often without their consent, to curb birth rates among the local population.
Mette Frederiksen, Denmark’s prime minister, told Reuters that “Greenland belongs to the people of Greenland” and only they should decide their future. She added that her government has apologized for colonial abuses, including these cases of contraception.
“We must have the courage to confront the mistakes of our shared past,” she said. “This is how we can build close and respectful relations between our two countries in the future. Greenland and Denmark – side by side.”
A White House spokesperson said Washington is now engaging in talks with Greenland and Denmark on national security, and views these talks as promising. The U.S. State Department added: “We are confident that a solution will be found that protects U.S. national security, takes into account Denmark and Greenland’s concerns, and significantly improves future prospects for the people of Greenland.”
Greenland’s Prime Minister Jens-Frederik Nielsen did not respond to a request for comment.
To understand the changes in the Arctic region, Reuters spoke with a large number of Greenlandic politicians, officials, and residents. Many regarded Lynge as the embodiment of a shift in the country’s political course.
“We are facing a geopolitical crisis, and if we must choose between the United States and Denmark here and now, we choose Denmark. We stand together in the Kingdom of Denmark.”
– Jens-Frederik Nielsen
Lynge’s move toward a position in favor of full independence occurred amid changes in public attitudes toward Denmark under pressure from the United States. He explained that his previously firm beliefs were part of his political mosaic, but recent events forced him to seek a path to compromise.
Care for a new strategy was also voiced by Lynge’s daughter, Pipaluk Lynge, who is part of the coalition government and chairs the Parliament’s Foreign Affairs and Security Committee.
“I think it’s clear to everyone: whether you are the foreign minister or the driver of a local bus, the world has changed. When the world changes, your strategy and thinking must also change.”
– Pipaluk Lynge
She admitted that her father often wondered at his own shifts in views. “He does not shy away from admitting that the views he held in his youth are now unrealistic,” Pipaluk said in an interview in the Greenland Parliament building.
She noted that her father’s return to positions that once seemed unattainable was prompted by Trump’s first term and his statements about a possible deal involving Greenland in 2019, after Denmark rejected such an idea as “absurd.”
According to her, Trump’s statement was for many people not just talk, but a signal that he might act on threatening promises – especially after the United States carried out an operation in January this year to detain Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro. Pipaluk believes that the world has changed, and this has also shifted people’s thinking, including in Greenland.
“It is very hard to understand that everything is different now,” concluded Pipaluk. “When the world changes, your strategy must also change.”
A few days after the Maduro operation, Prime Minister Nielsen expressed support for Denmark and said: “We are facing a geopolitical crisis, and if we must choose between the United States and Denmark here and now, we choose Denmark. We stand together in the Kingdom of Denmark.”
Lynge rejoiced: “I’m very glad that the government, a full coalition government, has finally stated: we are part of the Danish crown. Now we understand that the only freedom we have had for the last 300 years is the freedom together with Denmark.”
God Save Denmark and Greenland – Separately
By Aqqaluk Lynge
––– • –––
Greenland faces financial and structural challenges tied to a crisis caused by threats from the United States. The response from the Danish government and its NATO allies was swift: limited security contingents were deployed across the island, and Denmark began discussions with the CDC and other international partners. Denmark also expressed its intention to examine the history of its relations with Greenland and to open “some dark chapters” of their shared history in a new light.
In the past century and beyond, secrecy surrounded Denmark’s policy toward Greenland, notably related to birth-control tests and their impact on family dynamics. Although Denmark later acknowledged the mistakes and offered compensation to the affected, long‑standing anger remained in the memory of many people on the island. Talks about Greenland’s future continue and require clear and well-founded cooperation between the two sides – with involvement of the local population and international partners.
Changes in policy and public sentiment suggest that the period of confrontation may yield to a more cautious dialogue. At the same time, many Greenlanders believe that the real opportunity for self-determination depends not only on external factors but also on internal consensus about paths for economic and social development.
All these events underline that the Arctic region stands at a crossing between old constraints and new opportunities, where Greenland’s decisions now will be pivotal for its future and for the stability of the entire region.
Donald Trump continues to keep a close eye on the Arctic, but Greenland’s policy is taking on a new character – a more prudent and measured national course, with a focus on dialogue and cooperation with Denmark and Europe.
The ending of the story leaves open the question: will Greenland manage to maintain unity amid huge external pressures and internal differences, or will it, with Denmark and Europe’s support, still be able to maintain a stable course for the future?