Murkowski on Greenland: ‘Focus on continued partnership rather than possession.’

Washington, DC — U.S. Senator Lisa Murkowski (R-AK), co-chair of the Senate Arctic Caucus, today spoke on the Senate floor in support of Greenland’s autonomy and long-standing partnership with the United States.

The rough transcript of Senator Murkowki’s remarks can be found below.

Mr. President, as we begin this new year, there is certainly no shortage of issues before us. You and I have been engaged in productive discussions about how we address health coverage for millions of Americans who are facing dramatically higher costs in many cases. We recognize that there is a very short window in front of us, and for many, it already feels as though that window has closed. Still, there is important work left to do on that front.

We also have significant work ahead on the appropriations bills for fiscal year 2026. A looming deadline of January 30 is fast approaching. It is good news that we will be able to begin advancing the next minibus—three bills, including my Interior Subcommittee appropriations, as well as CJS and Energy and Water. From there, we must move quickly into the FY 2027 cycle, where we are already technically behind.

Beyond that, we clearly need to do more to address the situation around the world. We just had a vote on a motion to discharge a War Powers resolution related to Venezuela. We need to strengthen sanctions on Russia, which continues to prosecute its horrific war against Ukraine. We must work together to reach a bipartisan agreement on permitting reform. We make progress, then take a few steps back, but this reform is essential to building the infrastructure our country needs. And we all know we must tackle affordability issues that affect every American—whether related to the cost of goods or housing.

There is a great deal we need to be doing. But there is one thing we should not be doing—one thing we should not be spending our time on—and that is any effort to annex Greenland. That includes taking it by force, coercion, pressure, threat, or any related method. This is not an issue I ever expected to raise on the floor of the Senate.

In my more than two decades here, I have immersed myself in Arctic issues. I have strong relationships across the Arctic, including in Greenland. I have served as co-chair of the Arctic Parliamentarian Conference for years, alongside a strong Greenlandic woman whom I spoke with just this morning about the rhetoric coming out of Washington, D.C., directed toward her country.

The United States’ interest in Greenland is not entirely new. There were discussions as far back as 1867, when the United States purchased Alaska from Russia. At that time, Secretary Seward made inquiries about Greenland, but Congress showed no interest. During the Taft administration, a land swap was proposed in 1910 and rejected by Denmark. In 1946, at the outset of the Cold War, the Truman administration reportedly made a formal offer—$100 million in gold—to purchase Greenland. That, too, was rejected.

What followed was a shift away from acquisition toward partnership, based on shared national security interests. That cooperation allowed U.S. military assets to be based at what was then Thule, now Pituffik Space Base. These discussions belong to the distant past—until recently. In the past week, we have seen increasingly aggressive rhetoric from the Trump administration and some members of Congress.

There is a difference between discussion and conversation on the one hand, and what we are hearing now on the other. The statements being made suggest that taking Greenland—by force or coercion—is not only an option, but perhaps a priority, with military action on the table. That is profoundly troubling.

Many of us would like to quiet this rhetoric and make clear that such an option is not only unacceptable, but off the table entirely. Unfortunately, we have not received that assurance. While the Secretary of State has suggested that the focus is on purchase rather than military intervention, purchasing requires a willing buyer and a willing seller. Greenland and Denmark have made it abundantly clear that Greenland is not for sale.

As I speak with colleagues and friends across the Arctic, particularly in Greenland, they express deep concern and anxiety. They ask: What is the United States seeking? Greenland has a population of just 57,000 people—57,000 people living on a vast island who constitute an autonomous country striving for control over their own future. Greenland’s Prime Minister recently said that threats, pressure, and talk of annexation have no place between friends, and that Greenland’s future must be decided by its own people. We must take that message seriously.

This is also deeply unsettling for the people of Denmark, which administers defense and foreign policy for Greenland. It should unsettle anyone who understands the immense value of NATO. One founding member taking land from another would shatter this critical alliance, and we have already heard concern from our NATO allies. Frankly, this should unsettle all of us.

There is no reason to treat long-standing allies with such a profound lack of respect. We are talking about the people of Greenland, not to them. The people of Greenland are watching us, and we are not winning them over by treating them as if they were subjects rather than partners. This approach alienates Greenland, Denmark, and many of our allies in Europe, while setting a dangerous example for Russia and China.

Greenland is not Venezuela. It is not a narco-state run by an illegitimate dictator. It is a peaceful democracy and a faithful ally of the United States, dating back to World War II, when it played a pivotal role in the Allied victory. To this day, Greenland continues to host critical U.S. assets at Pituffik, providing invaluable strategic cooperation.

I was in Greenland just a few months ago and met with the new Prime Minister and President. He asked a simple question: What does the United States want? If the interest is national security or critical minerals, Greenland is eager to talk. They want dialogue with a friend and ally—not coercion.

Denmark’s Prime Minister has even suggested that if the United States seeks a larger military presence in Greenland, that is a conversation worth having, along with discussions on trade, tourism, and economic cooperation. Every one of our strategic goals can be accomplished with Greenland as a partner rather than a possession.

The idea of taking control of Greenland—especially by military force—would cause enormous harm to our national security and our international relationships. This is the 21st century. The United States should be setting the example for a rules-based global order, not undermining it by disregarding the sovereignty of others.

If we lose Greenland, we risk losing Denmark, our European partners, and NATO itself—delivering exactly what Russia and China want. There may be new partnership models worth discussing, such as a Compact of Free Association, but any such arrangement must be voluntary, respectful, and chosen freely by Greenland and Denmark, with congressional involvement.

How we talk to our friends and allies matters. Greenland’s Arctic strategy is titled“Greenland in the World: Nothing About Us Without Us.” That principle should guide us. Real people live in Greenland, and they are watching how the United States conducts itself.

Greenland is an extraordinary place—beautiful, resource-rich, and strategically vital, much like my home state of Alaska. We share cultural ties through the Inuit people and deep economic and social connections. But unlike Alaska, Greenland is not part of the United States. Taking it would be a colossal mistake—one that would end NATO and embolden autocratic regimes around the world.

Instead, we should continue building relationships—through trade, tourism, cultural exchange, and indigenous governance—rather than sending provocative messages that undo decades of trust.

Mr. President, we have much ahead of us in 2026. Taking—or buying—Greenland should not be on that list. I urge a reset in how these discussions are conducted. Let us choose respect, dialogue, cooperation, and partnership, and recognize Greenland as an ally—not an asset—and reject any notion of forced annexation or coercive action.

Visit our website at http://murkowski.senate.gov

Originally published on 8 January 2025.

Announcements are published as a service to readers. The sender is responsible for all content.

Announcements for publication can be submitted to [email protected].