Arctic

The United States, Denmark and Greenland are preparing to sign an agreement that could reshape the American military presence in the Arctic and ease a diplomatic dispute that has strained relations within NATO.

US President Donald Trump is due to meet Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen and Greenland Prime Minister Jens Frederik Nielsen in New York on Tuesday for a trilateral signing ceremony. The agreement is expected to allow Washington to expand its military infrastructure on Greenland, a strategically located and mineral rich territory of the Kingdom of Denmark.

The deal follows months of tension after Trump refused to rule out using military or economic pressure to bring Greenland under US control. The comments triggered a diplomatic crisis with Denmark and raised concerns about divisions within NATO.

The US military presence is set to expand

The agreement is expected to give the United States access to two additional military sites in Greenland, alongside the existing Pituffik Space Base.

One of the proposed locations is Narsarsuaq, a former Cold War airbase where only a small population remains. The other is Mestersvig, which is currently used by the Sirius Dog Sled Patrol, an elite Danish special forces unit.

The expansion would significantly increase the US military footprint on the island and mark the first major expansion of American military infrastructure there since the Cold War.

During that period, the United States operated 17 installations in Greenland and had more than 10,000 personnel on the island.

Greenland’s location between North America and the Arctic gives it considerable strategic importance. Its geography also places it close to major Arctic routes and areas of growing competition involving Russia, the United States and other NATO members.

NATO could play a larger role

Danish Foreign Minister Lars Lokke Rasmussen has said the agreement would place Arctic security more firmly within NATO’s collective framework rather than leaving responsibility primarily to Washington and Copenhagen.

That could be significant because the Greenland dispute exposed tensions within the alliance at a time when NATO members are already facing growing security concerns in the Arctic.

The Arctic has become increasingly important to NATO because of its geography, military access and emerging economic opportunities. Greater US military activity in Greenland could therefore become part of a wider alliance approach to Arctic security.

However, the precise role NATO would play remains unclear because the full text of the agreement has not yet been published.

What happens to Greenland’s sovereignty?

The agreement also leaves questions about the balance between US security interests, Danish sovereignty and Greenland’s aspirations for greater autonomy.

Greenland is a self governing territory within the Kingdom of Denmark. Its government has repeatedly maintained that decisions about Greenland’s future must involve Greenlanders themselves.

Trump said on Friday that the agreement would give the United States “permanent control over security, and all other needs, in Greenland.”

Denmark has not endorsed that description. Copenhagen has instead said that the agreement respects the kingdom’s sovereignty and Greenland’s right to self determination.

It remains unclear whether the agreement will modify the 1951 US Denmark defence treaty, which has provided the legal basis for America’s military presence on the island, or establish a separate framework.

From acquisition ambitions to military access

The agreement represents a significant shift from Trump’s earlier push to acquire Greenland outright.

Greenland is roughly three times the size of Texas but has a population of only about 57,000 people, concentrated in small communities along its coastline. The island is also rich in natural resources, adding an economic dimension to its strategic importance.

Trump’s earlier comments about potentially using economic or military pressure to obtain Greenland created an unusual dispute between the United States and Denmark, both members of NATO.

The new agreement appears to offer a different approach: rather than changing Greenland’s sovereignty, Washington would gain a substantially larger military presence on the island.

Why does Greenland matter to the US?

Greenland’s strategic location makes it important to North American and Arctic defence. It sits between the United States, Europe and the Arctic and can provide access for monitoring activity across the region.

For Washington, expanding military infrastructure could strengthen its ability to monitor Arctic air and maritime activity and support wider North American defence.

For Denmark and Greenland, however, the issue involves more than military strategy. Any expansion of US activity has to operate within Denmark’s sovereignty over the territory and Greenland’s right to determine its political future.

The agreement therefore seeks to address two competing pressures at once: the United States’ desire for greater Arctic security access and Denmark and Greenland’s insistence that such cooperation must not amount to a transfer of sovereignty.

If signed as expected, the deal could mark a new phase in the Arctic relationship between the three governments. It would not resolve every disagreement over Greenland’s future, but it could replace the earlier confrontation over US acquisition with a more structured framework for American military access and NATO security cooperation.

With information from Reuters.

Denmark, Greenland and the United States are set to sign a security agreement that Copenhagen says will give NATO a larger role in protecting the Arctic, potentially shifting responsibility beyond the United States and Denmark alone.

The agreement is expected to be signed at the United Nations General Assembly in New York on Tuesday. Its full contents have not been made public, although US President Donald Trump has described it as giving Washington “permanent control” over Greenland’s security.

Denmark and Greenland have not endorsed Trump’s description. Both have said the agreement will benefit Greenland while respecting the island’s sovereignty.

The deal follows months of pressure from Trump, who has repeatedly argued that the United States should control Greenland and at times declined to rule out military or economic measures to acquire the semi autonomous Danish territory.

His demands triggered a diplomatic crisis within NATO and pushed Copenhagen and Nuuk into negotiations with Washington to address US security concerns while maintaining Greenland’s status within the Kingdom of Denmark.

A broader NATO role

Danish Foreign Minister Lars Lokke Rasmussen said the agreement would change the way Arctic security is handled.

“It will be in a form where responsibility for security in the Arctic is not only Danish or American,” Rasmussen told Danish broadcaster TV2 on Sunday. He added that NATO would play a major role in protecting the region.

A NATO spokesperson said the alliance welcomed the agreement, describing it as a step that could advance security, stability and cooperation in the Arctic.

Rasmussen travelled to New York for the signing but has declined to disclose the agreement’s details.

He said Denmark had been open from the beginning to addressing what he described as legitimate US security interests.

The negotiations therefore appear to have focused on finding a framework that can accommodate Washington’s strategic concerns without formally transferring Greenland’s sovereignty to the United States.

Trump’s claim raises questions

Trump has offered a different description of what the agreement means.

In a post on Truth Social on Friday, he said the deal gives the United States “permanent control over security, and all other needs” in Greenland. He also said no US adversary would be able to establish a base or military presence on the island without Washington’s written approval.

Copenhagen has not publicly responded to that characterization.

The difference between Washington’s description and Denmark and Greenland’s public statements leaves important questions about the agreement unresolved.

Among the most significant is whether it changes the 1951 US Denmark defence agreement, which provides the legal basis for the American military presence in Greenland.

The document’s provisions on US access, military infrastructure and the role of NATO have not been made public.

Greenland at the centre

The agreement comes as Denmark acknowledges that it underinvested in Greenland’s defence for decades.

Copenhagen has since pledged to increase its military presence on the island and strengthen Arctic surveillance, including through greater NATO involvement.

Greenland’s government has sought to reassure residents that the negotiations do not compromise the island’s sovereignty.

Erik Jensen, an opposition lawmaker in Greenland, said on Facebook that he had read the draft agreement and felt reassured by its contents. He also praised Greenland’s foreign minister for handling the negotiations.

For Greenland, the issue is particularly sensitive because the island has extensive autonomy within the Kingdom of Denmark and has long maintained a political debate over eventual independence.

What the agreement could mean for the Arctic

The deal could mark a significant change in the security architecture of the Arctic.

Greenland occupies a strategically important position between North America and Europe, making it valuable to the United States and NATO as competition over the Arctic increases.

A larger NATO role could provide a multilateral framework for responding to concerns about military activity and strategic infrastructure in the region. At the same time, the agreement’s precise legal and operational arrangements will determine how far that shift actually goes.

Until the text is released, it remains unclear whether the agreement represents a substantial restructuring of Greenland’s defence arrangements or primarily a political framework for closer cooperation.

What is clear is that the negotiations have moved Arctic security from a dispute centred on US ambitions for Greenland toward a broader discussion about NATO’s collective role in one of the world’s increasingly contested strategic regions.

With information from Reuters.

Ukraine launches one of its deepest strikes to date, targeting gas plants in Russia’s Arctic region.

Russian forces have launched attacks across Ukraine, killing at least seven people, according to Ukrainian officials, as Kyiv claimed responsibility for a drone attack that set off a fire at a natural gas plant deep in Russia’s Arctic region.

Four people were killed in a Russian attack in Mykolaiv in southern Ukraine overnight on Thursday, while three were killed in a drone attack on a shopping centre in the northeastern city of Sumy, according to Ukrainian authorities.

Heorhii ⁠Reshetilov, the acting governor of the Mykolaiv region, said the Russian strikes there hit both civilian and industrial infrastructure, killing two men and two women. At least 19 others were wounded, he said on Telegram.

The attack in Sumy left at least 14 people wounded, according to Oleh Hryhorov, head of the Sumy Regional Military Administration. Three of the victims were children, he said on Telegram.

The Russian Ministry of Defence confirmed the attack in Mykolaiv, but said it targeted a drone warehouse. The ministry said it also hit the Ukrainian port of Chornomorsk and two vessels near Odesa on the Black Sea.

The targets of the strikes were being used for military purposes, the ministry claimed.

The attacks came after Russian authorities said Ukrainian forces had launched a drone attack on the country’s Yamal-Nenets region, which is located some 2,800 kilometres (1,700 miles) from the Ukrainian border.

Dmitry Artyukhov, the region’s governor, said the attack targeted an industrial facility in Novy Urengoy. The attack was repelled, but falling debris from the drone caused a fire, he said on Telegram.

“The main thing is that there were no deaths or injuries. The extent and nature of the damage are being determined,” he added.

Artem Zhoga, the Kremlin’s envoy to the Urals, said Wednesday’s strike was the first ever to hit the Arctic part of the region.

Ukraine’s Special Operations Forces (SOF) confirmed the attack in a series of posts on X.

“For the first time! Deepest strike of the war: Ukrainian SOF hit critical russian plants more than 3,000 km away,” it said. “Ukraine’s Special Operations Forces carried out the deepest strike inside russia since the beginning of the full-scale war.”

In the posts, the Ukrainian force claimed it “successfully struck” two gas plants, Novy Urengoy and Purovsky.

“Until today, the area was considered a safe rear zone for the aggressor,” it added.

The Ukrainian force said the facilities play a key role in Russia’s gas industry, processing large volumes of condensate from gas fields across the Yamal region, processing millions of tonnes of condensate per year.

Gazprom used ⁠to export gas from Yamal as far as Western Europe ⁠until relations broke ⁠down following the start of Russia’s war in Ukraine in 2022.

It estimated the region’s gas resources at ‌26.5 trillion cubic metres as of 2020, enough to cover global demand for more than ‌six ‌years.

Ukraine has escalated its long-range strikes on Russia in recent months, in retaliation for daily Russian bombardment of Ukrainian towns and cities.

Earlier this month, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said his country’s drones would make Russian airspace “completely unsafe” for the duration of the war.

COPENHAGEN: EU chief Ursula von der Leyen heads to Greenland on Sunday for a two-day visit aimed at reaffirming the bloc’s support for the Danish autonomous territory coveted by US President Donald Trump.

On Monday, she is due to sign a joint declaration between the European Union and Greenland.

“Greenland is becoming increasingly important to the EU as a gateway to the Arctic and because of its geopolitical location, critical raw materials and role in Arctic security,” Marc Jacobsen, a researcher at the Royal Danish Defence College, told AFP.

Trump was adamant earlier this year about Washington’s need to control the vast Arctic island for reasons of national security, though he ultimately ruled out annexing it by force.

A Danish-Greenlandic-US working group has since met regularly to find an agreement on cooperation going forward.

Following Trump’s threats, European countries broadly backed Denmark and Greenland, and in January von der Leyen vowed “massive” EU investment in Greenland to step up security in the Arctic.

Greenland is not a member of the bloc though Denmark is.

Brussels has also proposed doubling direct EU aid to Greenland to 530 million euros ($616 million) under the bloc’s next budget for the 2028-2034 period.

According to the Financial Times, von der Leyen is expected to propose an additional 200 million euros in support during her visit on Sunday and Monday.

Her visit coincides with the start of NATO’s Arctic Shield military exercise, bringing together soldiers from 10 countries.

Mikaa Blugeon-Mered, a geopolitics researcher at the University of Quebec, called the timing a “not insignificant coincidence”.

The Trump administration has repeatedly accused Denmark of neglecting Greenland and Arctic security.

Copenhagen has since reinvested in the region, as has NATO, which launched its Arctic Sentry mission at the start of the year.

“The EU cannot provide Greenland with a military security guarantee in the way NATO can, but it can provide something politically important: a clear signal that Greenland is not standing alone,” Jacobsen said.

Pressure

The message is all the more important as the US has kept up pressure on Greenland — though Trump has been less vocal since a May visit by his special envoy Jeff Landry.

“We’ve been getting ‘postcards’ from Trump or those close to him about Greenland every month, showing that they haven’t forgotten,” noted Blugeon-Mered.

One such image Trump posted on Truth Social in May showed him peering over the island, with the headline “Hello, Greenland!”.

In August, media reports of an American oil company’s preparatory operations in a remote region of eastern Greenland rekindled concerns on the island.

The project, run by a Texas-based company with licenses granted before a 2021 moratorium on oil and gas exploration and extraction, has left locals and authorities uneasy.

Authorities have yet to grant the company approval for exploratory drilling, citing procedural reasons.

Greenland is also struggling to develop its mining industry, which could help it fund its independence from Denmark.

In this area, Greenlandic and European interests are “highly complementary”, Jacobsen said.

“Greenland needs investment, infrastructure and markets if it is to realise its mining ambitions, while the EU is looking for more secure and diversified access to critical raw materials,” he said.

But turning Greenland’s geological potential into reality is proving more difficult than expected.

Some 135 mining permits are held by more than 60 companies, but only two mines are currently in operation.

“The question is whether the current geopolitical momentum will ultimately be a game-changer,” Jacobsen said.

Blugeon-Mered said von der Leyen’s visit to Greenland — her second in two years — was a strong signal that European investment is long-term.

The EU chief is scheduled to hold talks during her visit with Greenland Prime Minister Jens-Frederik Nielsen, Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen, and the head of government of Denmark’s other self-governing territory, the Faroe Islands.

Moscow challenges Norway’s seizure of vessel, the Professor Molchanov, calling it an act of piracy.

Norway has seized a Russian ship in ⁠the Arctic to ⁠enforce a compensation claim by Ukrainian energy firm Naftogaz, linked to Russian asset seizures in Crimea.

Norway seized the ship on Wednesday, after Moscow failed to pay Naftogaz $4.22bn plus interest and legal costs to compensate for ⁠assets it seized in ⁠Crimea after a tribunal ruling at The Hague in 2023.

In a post on X, Naftogaz said the seizure made up “part of global efforts to enforce the arbitral award obtained by Naftogaz against the Russian Federation in connection with the unlawful expropriation of their assets in Crimea, which Russia illegally annexed in 2014”.

The vessel, the Professor Molchanov, was taken off the Norwegian Arctic archipelago of Svalbard after a 24-hour standoff with the Norwegian Coast Guard, according ⁠to Covington, the US law firm representing Naftogaz.⁠

Russian state news agency TASS quoted a Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesperson as calling the Norwegian action “piracy”.

Alexei Chekunkov, Russia’s ⁠minister for the development of the Russian ⁠Far East and Arctic, ⁠said Moscow would challenge the ruling.

Chekunkov called Norway’s seizure of the Professor Molchanov “another ‌example of Western countries’ legal nihilism and lawlessness,” according to the ‌Interfax ‌news agency.

Naftogaz has been pursuing legal action against Russia since 2016 to seek compensation for the expropriation of its property in Crimea.

“Russia cannot evade responsibility simply by refusing to comply with an international arbitral award,” said Naftogaz Acting CEO Sergii Fedorenko.

“We will continue to pursue Russian assets around the world until the compensation ‌awarded ‌to Naftogaz and other Naftogaz Group companies is paid,” the Ukrainian company said.

Covington, the law firm, said it had been tracking the Professor Molchanov, a Russian-owned vessel that is used for commercial cruises, for months.

The ship was being used for commercial expedition cruises, including to Svalbard, according to the company.

Naftogaz said the passengers on board are being handled by Norwegian authorities.