Stephen Miller Asserts US Has Right To Take Greenland, & Wouldn’t Even Have To Fight For It

Stephen Miller, one of President Trump’s top aides who serves as his deputy chief of staff for policy, just poured more fuel on the fire in terms of the ongoing spat with Denmark over the future of Greenland and sovereignty.

He said in fresh remarks that there won’t be any military intervention to take the Arctic territory as simply “nobody is going to fight the United States militarily over the future of Greenland.“ More importantly he spelled out the US administration’s view that Denmark fundamentally does not have a right to the resource-rich Arctic territory.

Miller was asked by reporters on whether Trump might ‘invade’ Greenland next, after this weekend’s ‘shock’ Venezuela action. “What do you mean military action against Greenland? Greenland has a population of 30,000 people,” he began his response.

“The real question is what right does Denmark have to assert control over Greenland? What is the basis of their territorial claim? What is their basis of having Greenland as a colony of Denmark?” Miller then questioned.

And he added: “The US is the power of Nato. For the US to secure the Arctic region to protect and defend Nato and Nato interests, obviously Greenland should be part of the US. And so that’s a conversation that we’re going to have as a country. That’s a process we’re going to have as a community of nations.”

Despite the somewhat absurd diplomatic circus surrounding the Greenland question, which has of course remained highly entertaining, Miller has an indisputable point on his NATO comment. If Washington were to ever pull out of NATO, the military alliance would simply become one only on paper – akin to a mere ‘EU Army’.

Denmark’s foreign policy committee is meanwhile Tuesday evening having an emergency session to try and figure out how to handle the growing diplomatic showdown with the Trump administration. According to more background and context related to the latest:

The Danish prime minister, Mette Frederiksen, responded on Monday by saying that an attack by the US on a Nato ally would mean the end of the military alliance and “post-second world war security”. It would, she warned, mark the end of “everything”.

Greenland’s prime minister, Jens-Frederik Nielsen, also made a strong statement in which he urged Trump to give up his “fantasies about annexation” and accused the US of “completely and utterly unacceptable” rhetoric. “Enough is enough,” he said.

Miller’s comments about Greenland came after his wife, the rightwing podcaster Katie Miller, posted a map on X of Greenland draped in a US flag with the caption “SOON” hours after the military operation in Venezuela.

Stephen Miller was later asked about this, to which he explained: “It has been the formal position of the US government since the beginning of this administration, frankly going back into the previous Trump administration, that Greenland should be part of the US. The president has been very clear about that.”

Trump’s Greenland rhetoric currently does appear more than just about bombastic social media claims, memes or mocking Europe – as there’s currently said to be real, high level admin discussions:

According to two people familiar with private high-level discussions and granted anonymity to share their details, the White House has shown little interest in an overture last year from Denmark’s prime minister offering the U.S. the option to increase its military presence in Greenland, where it already operates a base and has long deployed troops at liberty.

“The option of more U.S. military presence has been on the table,” said one of the people, a European defense official. “The White House is not interested.”

The second person, an American in frequent contact with the administration and European officials, said that most of what Trump says he wants out of Greenland — access to investment resources like critical minerals, more troops and military bases, better intelligence sharing — could be easily accomplished by negotiating directly with Denmark, a steadfast ally.

Greenland – As viewed from a proper map

Why Greenland? Well because Moscow bases almost all of their strategic military assets on the Kola Peninsula next to Finland. This is where the Russian ICBM silos, submarine bases, and their strategic bombers are.

If you look at the… pic.twitter.com/z6qECCJ3u5

— Object Zero (@Object_Zero_) January 6, 2026

Europe is (as expected) immediately coming to Denmark’s defense:

Six European allies have rallied to support Denmark following renewed insistence by the US that it must have control over Greenland.

“Greenland belongs to its people, and only Denmark and Greenland can decide on matters concerning their relations,” the leaders of the UK, France, Germany, Italy, Poland, Spain, and Denmark said in a joint statement.

On Sunday, Donald Trump said the US “needed” Greenland – a semi-autonomous region of fellow Nato member Denmark – for security reasons.

Meanwhile fresh commentary by Rabobank has some creative ideas that the administration might want to take up, such as providing every Greenlander $1 million in exchange for their country, which they would likely find very attractive.

That fresh Rabobank commentary and thought experiment is re-presented in the below:

* * *

Historically, the Monroe Doctrine applied to Central and South America, but its geographic boundaries were never explicitly defined. The Trump Administration, however, may be getting creative with borders, suggesting the Doctrine could soon extend to Greenland (which is still technically in the Western Hemisphere).
Greenland first surfaced as a talking point during Trump’s campaign. This has re-emerged over the weekend with Trump announcing that the U.S. “need[s] Greenland from a national security situation,” and that “we will deal with Greenland in about two months. Let’s talk about Greenland in 20 days.” What exactly we’ll be talking about when it comes to Greenland is not yet clear, but Denmark—and the EU—is taking this as a threat.
Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen has said that “if the U.S. chooses to attack another NATO country militarily, then everything stops, including NATO and thus the security that has been established since the end of the Second World War.”

Greenland’s Prime Minister had some strong words for the Trump Administration, but seemed open to negotiations. “No more pressure,” he said, “No more fantasies of annexation. We are open to dialogue. We are open to discussions. But this must happen through the proper channels and with respect for international law.”

While an outright U.S. military takeover seems unlikely, diplomatic maneuvering is another matter. Trump’s approach to Statecraft has often been described as “too much stick, not enough carrot.” In the case of Greenland, we may see a bit more carrot. Still, with a population of only around 50,000, one might imagine a thought experiment where, for the low, low price of $50 billion, the U.S. offers every Greenlander $1 million in exchange for their country. That might prove more attractive.