75% of Americans Oppose the U.S. Attempting to Take Control of Greenland

The idea of the United States attempting to take control of Greenland has once again entered public debate, but a new CNN poll makes one thing abundantly clear: most Americans are not on board. According to the survey, 75% of Americans oppose any effort by the U.S. to control the vast Arctic island, while only a small minority support such a move.
This overwhelming opposition reflects more than just disagreement with a single policy proposal. It signals a deeper unease with expansionist foreign policy, concerns over international law, and fears that aggressive actions could undermine America’s global credibility and alliances.
Why Greenland Is Back in the Spotlight
Greenland, an autonomous territory within the Kingdom of Denmark, is the world’s largest island and one of the most strategically significant pieces of land in the Arctic. Its importance has grown as climate change accelerates ice melt, opening new shipping routes and increasing access to natural resources such as rare earth minerals, oil, and gas.
From a military standpoint, Greenland occupies a critical position between North America and Europe. The United States already maintains a military presence there, and defense analysts often point to the island’s role in missile detection and Arctic security. As global competition intensifies, especially with Russia and China expanding their Arctic ambitions, Greenland has become a symbol of strategic advantage.
However, while policymakers may view Greenland through a security lens, the American public appears far more cautious.
What the CNN Poll Reveals
The CNN poll paints a stark picture of public sentiment. A clear three-quarters of respondents oppose any U.S. attempt to take control of Greenland. This opposition spans political parties, age groups, and regions, making it one of the rare foreign policy issues where consensus leans strongly against intervention.
Key insights from the poll include:
Democrats show near-universal opposition, reflecting concerns about international norms and diplomacy.
Independents largely reject the idea, signaling discomfort with aggressive foreign policy regardless of party leadership.
Republicans are more divided, but even within the party, support does not reach a majority.
This broad resistance suggests that Americans are drawing a firm line between defending national interests and pursuing territorial control.
A Growing Skepticism Toward Expansionism
The Greenland debate taps into a larger shift in how Americans view their country’s role in the world. After decades of military interventions and prolonged conflicts, public appetite for bold, unilateral actions has diminished. Many Americans are wary of policies that resemble imperial ambitions, fearing they could lead to conflict, economic strain, or diplomatic fallout.
For younger generations especially, the concept of acquiring territory feels outdated. Instead, there is a growing emphasis on cooperation, multilateral agreements, and respect for sovereignty. The notion of “taking control” of another land — particularly one with its own people, culture, and government — clashes with these values.
Concerns About Military Force and Global Stability
One of the strongest reasons for opposition lies in fears about military escalation. While some proponents argue that Greenland could be acquired peacefully, critics worry that any serious attempt would inevitably involve pressure, coercion, or force.
Americans are also concerned about the international consequences. Denmark is a NATO ally, and Greenland’s status is protected under international agreements. Any aggressive move could strain NATO unity at a time when cooperation among allies is already being tested by global crises.
For many respondents, the potential damage to alliances outweighs any perceived strategic gain.
The Voices of Greenland and Denmark Matter
Another critical factor shaping public opinion is the perspective of those most directly affected. Leaders in Greenland and Denmark have repeatedly stated that Greenland is not for sale and not open to takeover. Greenland’s population, though small, has a strong sense of identity and self-governance, and polls conducted locally show overwhelming opposition to becoming part of the United States.
Many Americans find this argument persuasive. In a democracy that prides itself on supporting self-determination, ignoring the wishes of Greenlanders would undermine core American values.
What This Means for U.S. Foreign Policy
The CNN poll sends a clear warning to policymakers: public support for aggressive foreign policy moves is limited. Americans want their country to remain influential, but not at the cost of international stability or moral authority.
This does not mean Americans are indifferent to Arctic security or global competition. Instead, they appear to favor practical engagement — strengthening alliances, investing in diplomacy, and cooperating with partners — rather than pursuing control over foreign territory.
Greenland’s strategic importance can be addressed through agreements, shared defense initiatives, and economic partnerships without crossing into controversial territory acquisition.
A Defining Moment for Public Opinion
Public opinion has always played a complex role in shaping U.S. foreign policy. While leaders often act based on strategic calculations, sustained public opposition can limit what is politically feasible. In this case, the message from Americans is unambiguous.
The idea of taking control of Greenland may appeal to a narrow group focused on power projection, but for most Americans, it represents unnecessary risk, ethical concerns, and a step backward in global leadership.
Conclusion: A Clear Message from Americans
The CNN poll revealing that 75% of Americans oppose U.S. control of Greenland is more than just a snapshot of opinion. It reflects a broader desire for restraint, respect for sovereignty, and a foreign policy rooted in cooperation rather than domination.
As debates over Arctic security and global influence continue, U.S. leaders may need to recalibrate their approach — not only to align with international norms but also to respect the clear preferences of the American public. In an interconnected world facing shared challenges, Americans appear to believe that partnership, not possession, is the smarter path forward.