Greenland’s nuclear defence role and Trump’s ‘Golden Dome’ plan explained

Greenland, a vast Arctic island governed by Denmark, has emerged as a surprising focal point in global nuclear defence debates after US President Donald Trump renewed calls for American ownership of the territory. Trump argues that Greenland is essential to his proposed “Golden Dome,” a multibillion-dollar missile defence system he claims will shield the United States from nuclear threats posed by Russia and China.

The strategic importance of Greenland lies largely in geography. In any hypothetical nuclear conflict, intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) launched between the US, Russia and China would likely travel over the Arctic, following the shortest possible flight paths. Many of these trajectories pass directly over or near Greenland, placing the island squarely under potential missile corridors.

A key pillar of this role is the Pituffik Space Base, formerly known as Thule Air Base. Located above the Arctic Circle, the base hosts one of the Pentagon’s most powerful early-warning radars, the AN/FPS-132. This radar can detect and track ballistic missile launches thousands of kilometres away, giving US decision-makers crucial extra minutes to assess threats and activate defences. Its position roughly midway between North America and Russia makes it uniquely valuable for monitoring launches from Eurasia.

Trump has repeatedly claimed that owning Greenland is necessary to fully integrate it into the Golden Dome system, arguing that “you can’t defend it on a lease.” However, defence experts dispute this logic. The United States has operated military facilities in Greenland for decades under a 1951 defence agreement with Denmark, without needing sovereignty over the territory. Similar arrangements exist elsewhere, such as in the United Kingdom, which hosts key US-linked missile warning infrastructure.

Critics also note that Trump’s Golden Dome concept increasingly relies on space-based sensors and layered defences, which could reduce reliance on fixed radar sites like Pituffik over time. These evolving technologies, experts say, weaken the argument that Greenland is indispensable—or that US ownership is required.

While Greenland could theoretically host missile interceptors due to its location, analysts point out that Denmark has historically been one of Washington’s most cooperative allies. Before Trump’s aggressive rhetoric, expanded US military access would likely have faced little resistance. Now, his push for acquisition has instead strained relations and heightened unease among Greenlanders and European allies.

ADVERTISEMENT