Trump Says Rare Earths Are Part of His Greenland Deal: It’s ‘Completely Bonkers

In 2019, former U.S. President Donald Trump stirred controversy by proposing that the United States purchase Greenland, the vast Arctic island governed by Denmark. While many thought the idea was simply outlandish — or even absurd — one of the most unexpected elements of his pitch was his suggestion that the purchase could help secure rare earth elements. Trump’s words that rare earths were a part of his Greenland deal were met with shock and disbelief. Critics quickly dismissed the notion, calling it “completely bonkers.” But what are rare earths, and why would they have mattered in this context? And more importantly, does Trump’s claim about Greenland’s strategic value hold any weight?

In this article, we will break down Trump’s comments, the role of rare earths in global politics, and why his “Greenland deal” sparked such strong reactions.

Understanding Rare Earth Elements: A Crucial Global Resource

Rare earth elements (REEs) are a group of 17 chemical elements found in the Earth’s crust that are essential in the production of high-tech electronics, renewable energy systems, military technologies, and more. They are used in everything from smartphones, laptops, and electric vehicles to wind turbines and missile systems. These elements, including neodymium, lanthanum, and dysprosium, are vital for global supply chains but are not actually all that rare in the Earth’s crust. The term “rare earth” is more about the difficulty in extracting and processing them, not their abundance.

Currently, the global supply of rare earths is highly concentrated, with China dominating the market. China controls around 80% of the world’s supply of these critical materials, giving it immense leverage in global politics and trade. This dominance has raised alarms in Western countries, including the United States, as the security of these supplies is crucial for both economic and military power.

Trump's Greenland Deal and Rare Earths: A Geopolitical Play?

In 2019, President Trump floated the idea of purchasing Greenland as a way for the United States to expand its influence in the Arctic, gain access to its vast natural resources, and secure a foothold in an increasingly competitive region. In addition to military and strategic benefits, Trump’s pitch suggested that Greenland’s untapped resources — including rare earths — could be an important factor in the deal.

The idea of acquiring Greenland for its natural resources wasn’t exactly new. Greenland has rich deposits of minerals, oil, and gas, and some estimates suggest that its untapped rare earth deposits could be substantial. But the question is, why did Trump specifically focus on rare earths in his Greenland deal?

Trump’s interest in securing access to Greenland’s rare earth resources may have been driven by two factors:

China’s dominance over rare earths, which has long been a source of tension in U.S. trade relations.

The strategic value of Greenland’s mineral resources, which could help reduce U.S. dependency on China for critical materials.

But his suggestion that Greenland could be a source of rare earths directly tied to the potential purchase of the island was widely seen as naïve and over-simplified. Critics quickly dismissed this idea, calling it “completely bonkers” and pointing out that it wasn’t nearly as simple as acquiring Greenland and immediately tapping into its rare earths.

Why Was Trump’s Rare Earth Claim So Controversial?

The controversy around Trump’s rare earths claim centers on several factors:

1. Greenland’s Mining Challenges

While Greenland does indeed have some mineral deposits, including potential reserves of rare earth elements, extracting these materials is no easy task. Greenland’s harsh Arctic environment presents significant logistical and environmental challenges. The island is sparsely populated, with much of the land covered in ice, and many of the mineral deposits are in remote areas that would require substantial investment in infrastructure to access.

Moreover, Greenland’s government has historically been cautious about large-scale mining projects, particularly in sensitive environmental areas. While mining offers economic opportunities, it also presents environmental risks that the local population, as well as the Danish government, must carefully consider.

2. The Political and Legal Reality of the Deal

Greenland is not an independent country. It is an autonomous territory of Denmark, which controls its foreign policy and defense. For the United States to “purchase” Greenland, it would have to negotiate not only with Greenland’s government but also with Denmark. This raises a whole host of political and diplomatic issues that Trump’s suggestion largely ignored.

In fact, the Danish Prime Minister at the time, Mette Frederiksen, dismissed the idea of selling Greenland, calling it “absurd.” The suggestion that the U.S. could simply buy the island was unrealistic from a diplomatic standpoint.

3. The Overemphasis on Rare Earths as a Driver

Trump’s comments about rare earths suggested that simply gaining access to Greenland would automatically solve the United States’ dependence on China for these critical minerals. However, the reality is much more complex. While Greenland does hold some potential for rare earth extraction, it would take decades to develop the necessary infrastructure, technology, and expertise to mine these elements effectively. The U.S. already has access to rare earths from other countries, such as Australia, and building a new supply chain from Greenland would be a long-term project at best.

What Does Greenland’s Strategic Importance Really Look Like?

While Trump’s deal-making approach may have been seen as a misstep, the strategic importance of Greenland cannot be entirely dismissed. Beyond rare earths, Greenland’s location in the Arctic makes it a valuable asset for military strategy, energy resources, and global trade.

Military and Surveillance: Greenland’s location places it in close proximity to Russia, making it a key strategic site for the U.S. to monitor military activities in the Arctic and beyond. The Thule Air Base is one of the U.S.'s northernmost military outposts.

Natural Resources: Greenland’s untapped oil, gas, and mineral reserves hold long-term potential, especially as climate change opens up new shipping routes and opportunities for exploration.

Geopolitical Influence: As competition in the Arctic heats up, the U.S. could strengthen its position by building stronger relationships with Greenland and Denmark, without the need for a full purchase.

Conclusion: Was Trump’s Rare Earths Pitch Really ‘Bonkers’?

Trump’s claim that rare earths played a central role in his Greenland deal was met with widespread skepticism and ridicule. While his desire to secure these critical resources was not entirely out of line, the idea that purchasing Greenland would immediately resolve the U.S.’s rare earth supply issues was oversimplified and unrealistic.

However, the broader conversation about Greenland’s strategic value is important. As the world’s focus shifts to the Arctic and rare earths become more essential, the geopolitical and economic importance of Greenland will continue to grow.

Trump’s idea may have been controversial and poorly executed, but it highlighted a real issue: how nations, especially the U.S., must plan for the changing dynamics of global power, resource access, and military strategy.