Geopolitics and Greenland: The Strategic Dimension

 

Article from April 1965 on the U.S. military installations related to NADGE (NATO Air Defense Ground Environment). The objective was to reduce by 30 minutes the detection time of intercontinental missiles launched from the USSR and directed toward the United States, thus allowing sufficient time to respond by launching Minuteman missiles in retaliation.

At the time, the location of the installation was classified, but it later became clear that it was situated in Greenland. Naturally, the United States intended to keep the matter highly confidential.

The issue of the “space shield” was revived in the 1980s by Ronald Reagan through the Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI), nicknamed Star Wars. This initiative contributed to the collapse of the USSR, which could no longer compete technologically with the United States while simultaneously sustaining the financial burden of its war in Afghanistan.

Greenland has never been primarily about rare earths. It is a matter of strategic geometry.

During the Cold War, the shortest route for an intercontinental ballistic missile between the USSR and the United States passed over the North Pole. This simple geographic fact turned the Arctic into a decisive frontier. In that context, integrated early-warning systems were developed between the United States, Canada, and Europe within NATO, including the NATO Air Defense Ground Environment (NADGE), part of the broader Western defensive architecture.

The American presence in Greenland consolidated around installations such as Thule Air Base (now Pituffik Space Base), essential for radar detection and space monitoring. The objective was not merely to “see an attack coming,” but to reduce reaction time, a crucial element in nuclear deterrence logic.

In the 1980s, the issue expanded with the Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI), launched by the administration of Ronald Reagan. The idea of a “space shield” was never fully realized in its original terms, but it intensified technological and economic pressure on the Soviet Union..

Greenland Today: Beyond the “Rare Earths” Narrative

Mineral resources do exist, but the economic argument is secondary to the strategic function. In extreme environments such as the Arctic, industrial exploitation is viable only under very favorable market and logistical conditions. If large-scale extraction were already economically sustainable, it would likely be underway.

The central issue lies elsewhere:

• control of polar routes, increasingly navigable;

• control of airspace and orbital domains;

• integration of ground radar, satellites, sensors, digital networks, and advanced analytical systems.

In an era where artificial intelligence, electronic warfare, and space capabilities are integrated, the Arctic once again becomes a critical node in North American security. In this framework, positions taken by figures such as Donald Trump should not be read merely as personal initiatives, but as expressions of strategic continuity within the U.S. military establishment.

A Historical Perspective

Greenland’s strategic value did not emerge today. It is the result of over sixty years of strategic continuity, beginning with bipolar nuclear confrontation and extending to today’s competition among major powers in the technological and space domains.

A purely economic interpretation reduces the issue. The key remains the same:
reaction time, control of polar routes, and integrated technological superiority.

In this sense, Greenland is not a diplomatic anomaly, but a coherent element within a long-standing Arctic strategy.