Författare: Darius von Guttner Sporzynski Historian Australian Catholic

Donald Trump has long been interested in Greenland becoming part of the United States. Yesterday, he told reporters he would not rule out using military force to acquire the Danish territory, saying “we need” it for the “economic security” of the United States. As he spoke, his son Donald Jr was in Greenland, on what is described as a private visit.

Last week, Greenland’s prime minister Múte Egede called for independence from Denmark and for the “shackles of the colonial era” to be broken. Last year, on December 23, he explicitly rejected Trump’s interest: “Greenland is ours. We are not for sale and will never be for sale.”

The Danish prime minister similarly dismissed the notion of Trump buying Greenland as absurd when he first raised it in 2019. Yet, Trump’s fascination with the Arctic island persists, reflecting broader geopolitical interests in the region.

Donald Trump Jr in Nuuk, Greenland, this week, as his father calls its acquisition by the US essential.
Emil Stach/Denmark Out/AAP

As the ice melts, new shipping routes and untapped resources, particularly rare earth minerals, have elevated Greenland’s strategic importance. It is the site of one of the world’s largest known rare earth metal deposits. And the Greenland Institute of Natural Resources reports “huge potential for oil exploitation in the waters” offshore.

But while Trump’s rhetoric is outlandish, Greenland’s history tells a deeper story of colonial entanglements, autonomy struggles, and international manoeuvring.

On the map, Greenland is nearest to Canada, though also very near Nordic Europe. Canada’s Ellesmere Island lies just 26 km to the north and Iceland is about 320 km to the southeast. While geographically part of North America, Greenland has maintained political and cultural ties with Europe, particularly Norway and Denmark, for over a millennium.

Denmark’s king sends a message

The Danish Royal Coat of Arms, revised in 2024.
Danish Royal Household

On December 20 2024, Denmark’s king, Frederik X, proclaimed a significant, but not unexpected, update to the royal coat of arms. Gone were the three crowns symbolising the historic Kalmar Union between Denmark, Norway and Sweden, which lasted from 1397 to 1523. In their place, the king opted for symbols more reflective of Denmark’s current realm: a prominent polar bear for Greenland and a ram for the Faroe Islands.

Denmark’s royal household announced: “The King wishes to create a contemporary royal coat of arms that both reflects the Realm and takes into account history as well as the heraldic tradition.”

The change, therefore, is essentially a modernisation, giving equal status to all parts of the kingdom. Political commentators around the world interpreted it as a message of solidarity with Greenland and the Faroe Islands at a time of growing tensions, particularly in light of Trump’s aggressive interest and Greenland’s calls for independence.

A brief colonial history of Greenland

Greenland has been inhabited for over 4,500 years by peoples moving there in a series of migrations from regions as diverse as Siberia, Alaska and Arctic Canada. The most recent Inuit migration occurred in the 13th century.

In the 10th century, Erik the Red, a Norwegian-born exile from Iceland, settled on the island. He named it Greenland and led expeditions that established several prosperous Norse settlements. Christianity was introduced in the 11th century by Erik’s son, Leif Eriksson. The first bishop’s seat was established in 1126.

Greenland was named by Erik the Red, a Norwegian-born exile from Iceland who settled there in the 10th century.
Dana File/AAP

From the 13th century onwards, Norse settlers engaged with the Inuit cultures. However, by the 14th century, climate cooling led to the decline of Norse communities, which were abandoned by the 15th century. Approximately a century later, expeditions from England and Norway arrived in Greenland. By the 17th and 18th centuries, European whalers frequently interacted with the Inuit, leading to extensive trade and Lutheran mission of Norwegian clergyman Hans Egede.

The US recognised Danish sovereignty in 1916

Greenland has been under Danish control for centuries, but full sovereignty over the island was not always guaranteed. In fact, a key development came from an unlikely source: the US. On August 4 1916, the US signed a declaration recognising Denmark’s sovereignty over the entirety of Greenland. This agreement was annexed to the sale of the Danish West Indies (now the US Virgin Islands) to the US. This represented a shift in America’s interpretation of its own Monroe Doctrine.

The Monroe Doctrine, articulated in 1823, warned European powers against further colonisation or intervention in the Americas. Yet, in 1916, the US effectively supported Denmark’s colonial ambitions by legally recognising its claim to Greenland. At the time, Denmark’s control was limited to settlements along Greenland’s west coast. From the 1880s onwards, Danish outposts expanded into the north and east, culminating in the formal declaration of sovereignty over the entire island in 1921.

This US recognition was critical: it legitimised Denmark’s claim internationally, barring objections from Norway, which sought to expand its Arctic fishing territories. Norway’s ambitions were thwarted, solidifying Greenland’s status as a Danish possession.

Colonial legacy and calls for independence

Denmark’s relationship with Greenland has evolved from outright colonisation to the current status of Greenland as an autonomous territory. Since gaining home rule in 1979 and self-government in 2009, Greenland has taken steps toward greater independence. Yet, it remains tied to Denmark in crucial ways, particularly through defence and foreign policy.

Greenland’s relationship with Denmark has evolved from outright colonisation, and continues to evolve.
Mads Claus Rasmussen/Denmark Out/AAP

Despite autonomy, Greenland’s colonial legacy casts a long shadow. Controversies such as the forced contraceptive scandal of the 1960s and 1970s, where Greenlandic women were subjected to coerced sterilisation, have fuelled resentment toward Denmark.

This painful history resurfaced last week, with prime minister Egede accusing Denmark of genocide over the scandal.

Why does Trump want Greenland?

Greenland’s importance on the global stage is multifaceted. Its location in the Arctic makes it a key focus for military strategy, climate research and resource extraction.

For Denmark, retaining Greenland is not only a matter of historical continuity, but also geopolitical necessity. Meanwhile, for the US, the Arctic represents a frontier of strategic competition, particularly with Russia and China.

For Denmark, retaining Greenland is a geopolitical necessity.
Ida Marie Odgaard/Denmark Out/AAP

In this context, Trump’s 2019 suggestion to “buy” Greenland seemed tone-deaf but not entirely without precedent. The US has long sought influence in Greenland, dating back to World War II, when it established military bases on the island. The 1916 recognition of Danish sovereignty may have been a legal formality, but it underscored the US’s pragmatic interest in Greenland’s strategic location.

Greenland’s future

King Frederik’s decision to emphasise Greenland and the Faroe Islands in Denmark’s coat of arms reflects the kingdom’s current priorities. The new design asserts they are integral parts of Denmark, not negotiable assets to be sold or relinquished.

As Greenland edges closer to independence, its journey reflects the reality of its history, geography and politics. For centuries, Denmark’s control over Greenland was contested and tenuous. Today, the question is not whether Denmark can retain sovereignty, but whether Greenland will choose to remain part of the Danish realm.

Trump’s remarks about “mak[ing] Greenland great again” may have been met with ridicule, but they inadvertently highlight the broader significance of this icy island.

Greenland’s colonial history, evolving autonomy and geopolitical importance ensure it will remain at the centre of global attention. Läs mer…

The new film Conclave is a psychological thriller looking at the selection of the new pope. But what is a conclave, and where did this ritual begin?

The institution of the conclave is the formal process by which a pope is elected.

As cardinals cast their secret ballots, they partake in a process that upholds the Catholic Church’s millennia-old heritage and navigates the dynamics of contemporary global power, making the conclave a powerful intersection of faith, tradition, and geopolitics.

Who gets to be pope?

The pope’s role is deeply rooted in both spiritual and historical significance. The pope is the successor of Saint Peter, one of Jesus Christ’s disciples, entrusted by Jesus with the leadership of the early Christian Church.

The pope serves as the sovereign of the Holy See, the central governing body of the Catholic Church, and the head of state of the Vatican City State. The Holy See holds the status of an independent state in international law and maintains diplomatic relations with other countries and organisations such as the United Nations.

Portrait of Pope Leo X with Two Cardinals, Andrea del Sarto,1523.
Museo e Real Bosco di Capodimonte/Wikimedia Commons

Any Roman Catholic male can be elected pope. But since the Middle Ages, every pope has been selected from the College of Cardinals, the group of highest-ranking Catholic leaders.

Many of the cardinals are archbishops and bishops appointed by the pope to lead Catholic communities in their country of residence.

Who gets to vote?

In the early Church, the Bishop of Rome was elected by the local clergy and laity. Over time, the clergy became the primary body responsible for the election, although the laity initially retained a degree of influence.

In 1059, Pope Nicholas II decreed only cardinals would primarily elect the pope, laying the groundwork for the formal role of the College of Cardinals. This shift marked the beginning of a more structured electoral procedure.

To expedite elections, in 1274 Pope Gregory X introduced the conclave system, sequestering the cardinals and rationing their food until a decision was reached.

Papal conclave following the death of Pope Alessandro VII, with an iconographic map of Vatican City and scenes of the funeral, procession, and election of the new pope, 1667.
The Metropolitan Museum of Art

The process became further standardised in the modern era. Pope Gregory XV in the early 17th century introduced a secret ballot system and reinforced the two-thirds majority rule, aiming to ensure electoral integrity and prevent manipulation.

In the 20th century, Pope Paul VI implemented significant changes. Cardinals over 80 years old were barred from voting, and the number of cardinal electors was capped at 120.

Today, there are 236 cardinals, and 123 are eligible to vote to elect a new pope.

How is a vote cast?

Various methods have been used to elect the Pope throughout history.

Acclamation, where cardinals unanimously declared a pope without a formal vote, was abolished in 1621. Another method was compromise, where a deadlocked College of Cardinals delegated the decision to a committee; this was last used in 1316.

The current method, known as scrutiny, involves a secret ballot.

Today, the papal election is governed essentially by rules set by Pope John Paul II in 1996. Cardinals reside in the Domus Sanctae Marthae within the Vatican during the conclave, but vote in the Sistine Chapel.

Cardinals walk in procession to the Sistine Chapel at the beginning of the 2005 conclave.
AP Photo/Osservatore Romano

The dean of the College of Cardinals oversees the process, unless he is over 80 and age restricts his participation. Only cardinals participate in the election and, while campaigning for the papacy is discouraged, potential candidates are informally referred to as papabili (eligible).

When a pope dies, the cardinal camerlengo – the chief Vatican administrator – verifies the death and takes possession of the Ring of the Fisherman (the pope’s ring) which, along with the papal seal, is later destroyed to symbolise the end of the papacy.

During the period of papacy’s vacancy (sede vacante) the College of Cardinals assumes limited authority and manages the Church’s day-to-day matters.

The conclave to elect the new pope typically begins 15 to 20 days after the pope’s death, following the period of mourning. In the case of papal resignation, as with Benedict XVI in 2013, similar procedures apply.

Before the conclave, the cardinals attend two sermons that outline the Church’s current state and the qualities needed in a new pope. On the designated day, they celebrate Mass in St. Peter’s Basilica and proceed to the Sistine Chapel, where they take an oath of secrecy and adherence to the election rules.

After the oath, all non-participants are ordered to leave the chapel.

Black smoke, pictured here in 2013, indicates a new pope has not been elected.
AP Photo/Dmitry Lovetsky

The conclave’s strict secrecy is enforced, with severe penalties for breaches. All electronic communication is blocked to prevent external interference.

Cardinals receive ballot cards and vote in the Sistine Chapel, with up to four ballots held daily. A two-thirds majority is required for election, and if a result is not reached, a runoff occurs between the top two candidates.

The ballots are then burned, with white smoke indicating a successful election and black smoke signalling no decision.

External influences

Secular rulers heavily influenced papal elections for much of the Church’s history. The Holy Roman Empire asserted control in the 9th century. From the 17th century, some Catholic monarchs held a veto power, used for the last time in 1903, when Pope Pius X banned government interference.

Despite this controlled environment, the world of politics, friendships and alliances, and the personal ambitions of the cardinals shape the outcome.

The conclave not only serves as a means of selecting the leader of the Catholic Church, but also reflects broader power dynamics within and beyond the Vatican. Läs mer…