A plane with German Bundeswehr soldiers after landing in Greenland. Photo / Getty Images
Donald Trump has said his much-vaunted desire to acquire Greenland is all about United States national security.
At first, the US President claimed the Arctic island, a self-governing territory of the Kingdom of Denmark, was being swarmed by Russian and Chinese vessels.
Then he said ownership of the sprawling territory was vital for his planned “Golden Dome” missile-defence shield.
There are hints of truth in both of Trump’s claims, but security experts have largely argued that a US acquisition of Greenland is not necessary to address the national security concerns.
The sparsely populated island plays an outsized role in the US and Nato’s wider air-defence architecture.
It sits smack bang in the middle of the shortest flight path between Moscow and Washington – known as the great-circle distance.
Technically, the island is 2000 miles (3218km) from Washington and 2000 miles from Moscow.
The base serves as the US military’s northernmost base – about 1450km from the North Pole. It is home to around 150 troops and is a key cog in Washington’s early warning system for missiles.
If Russia or China were to fire a ballistic missile at the US, its path would probably cross directly over Greenland, which is why the primary role of the personnel at Pituffik is to scan the skies for incoming aerial threats.
But the US military footprint on Greenland has significantly dwindled since the end of the Cold War.
At its peak, Washington had 17 installations and 15,000 soldiers on the island, hunting for Soviet submarines and ships, as well as ready for a feared invasion.
This was underpinned by a 1951 agreement signed between the US and Danish governments.
Copenhagen has repeatedly argued this deal still stands, and there is nothing stopping Trump from deploying more soldiers to Greenland without the need to acquire the island.
This includes hosting any assets that would contribute to the US’ Golden Dome project – a US$175 billion ($304 billion) air-defence system that would mimic Israel’s Iron Dome, but on a vastly larger scale.
However, Trump had not mentioned Greenland as vital to this decade-long project until recently – suggesting it has become a convenient excuse for the White House to use.
The Golden Dome project, it has been claimed, would also involve a system of satellites – some that track missiles and others that fire their own projectiles to shoot them down.
While analysts have questioned whether such technology even exists, or is likely to exist any time soon, US ownership of Greenland would not be a prerequisite for a US satellite defence system.
In real terms, Pituffik’s importance is expected to grow as climate change reshapes the Arctic by opening up new trade routes close to North America.
Greenland sits where the Arctic Ocean meets the Atlantic.
Russian ships and submarines leaving the country’s Arctic region bases to head south have to pass nearby to do so.
One of the main routes sees the Russian vessels pass through the waters between Greenland, Iceland, and the United Kingdom – known as the GIUK Gap.
A second gap – the Bear Gap – between Norway and Iceland has also emerged as a favoured option.
Since President Vladimir Putin ordered his invasion of Ukraine, Nato has increased its aerial and naval patrols in the area.
Denmark has said it will invest €2 billion to bolster its Arctic Command with new ships, drones and surveillance aircraft to guard the region. The spending was announced in January last year to deter Trump’s interest in Greenland.
Again, as with missile defence, bolstering security in the waters around Greenland does not require US acquisition of the island.
Denmark insists Washington could use existing treaties to address those national security concerns.
Greenland’s geography might provide the easiest route to explaining Trump’s desire to acquire the territory.
The island’s capital is in fact closer to Washington than it is Copenhagen.
But it could be down to the maps drawn by Gerardus Mercator in the 16th century, and still commonly used today.
On the Mercator Map, areas near the poles are greatly exaggerated in size.
Greenland can appear to be the same size of Africa, despite being 14-times smaller. South America also appears smaller than the Arctic island.
Trump has publicly spoken of his love of maps, and for the size of perceived regional superpowers, such as the US or Russia.
To some, the Mercator Distortion could just make a combined US-Greenland landmass look bigger than Russia.