America and Greenland share a continent. They both have water on their East and West sides. The cost of living and number of airports is different, as is the size of their populations and their geography.
But according to a new poll that asked Americans what they think of President-elect Donald Trump’s plan to acquire Greenland, they have another thing in common: People in both countries think it’s not a great idea.
Even for an elected president with a track record of surprising proposals, Trump’s floated suggestion to take over the Arctic territory was met with widespread shock, according to an exclusive new USA TODAY/Suffolk University Poll.
The survey broadly mirrors anecdotal evidence that has emerged from Greenland in recent days in which people have been expressing consternation and confusion, but also a limited degree of excitement at Trump’s proposal.
More than half say it’s a bad idea; among those who think it’s a good idea, the majority think it’s unrealistic, according to an exclusive new USA TODAY/Suffolk University Poll.
Of 1,000 people polled from Jan. 7 to Jan. 11, 53% didn’t support acquiring Greenland, 29% thought it was a good idea but didn’t think it could realistically happen, and just 11% said the Trump administration should do everything it can to make it a reality.
Unsurprisingly, the vast majority of Democrats – 86% – were opposed to taking Greenland. But among Republicans, just 23% said Trump should pursue the policy, while around half – 48% – said it was good but unrealistic and 21% said it was not a good plan.
More:‘Buy us!’: Greenlanders shocked, intrigued, bewildered by Trump zeal for Arctic territory
Gray Holland, 23, cast his ballot for Trump in November in the hopes Trump would cut funding for Ukraine and crack down on immigration. But taking over Greenland, Holland said, seemed like a bad joke.
“I thought it was funny at first, him joking about that idea,” said Gray, who lives in Cary, North Carolina, and works in sports tickets operations. “But once he started actually talking about military deployment … no, I cannot get behind that.”
Some Democrats had harsher words for the idea. “That’s the most stupid thing I’ve ever heard,” said Daniel Ander, 68, a retired civil engineer from Port Orchard, Washington. Trump “likes to do all this chaos so you don’t really realize nothing’s happening. He’s just creating chaos.”
Trump has floated the idea of buying Greenland since his election victory in November. But last week, he also refused to rule out taking over the territory through military force.
More:Why does Trump want Greenland and the Panama Canal so badly? One reason may surprise you
Why Greenland? Trump says the U.S. needs it for “national security purposes.” Although the U.S. already has a military base on the island, Russian and Chinese ships are “all over the place,” he said.
Greenland’s land is also rich with minerals and natural resources that could make the U.S. less economically reliant on China in some sectors.
Christy Rangel, 51, an independent who leans Democratic, compared Trump’s designs on Greenland to Russian President Vladimir Putin’s invasion of Ukraine. “He looks up to Putin, and Putin just went into Ukraine and took it,” Rangel said, referring to Trump’s past praise of Putin as a “genius” for launching the invasion. “That’s what he thinks he can do with Greenland.”
Rangel, a legal secretary from Baton Rouge, Louisiana, said she thought Trump wanted only to monetize Greenland’s natural wealth. “It’s a play for getting resources that he can then sell,” she said.
Still, some of Trump’s steadfast supporters stood by his ambitions to take the 836,000-square-mile island. “I think that’s great,” said Cynthia Harrison, 57, a Republican from Stowe, Vermont, who worked at a ski resort before she retired. “There’s all kinds of rare-earth minerals up there,” and “the Chinese and the Russians keep getting closer and closer.”
Greenland has been a territory of Denmark since the 19th century. It has its own parliament, which oversees some domestic and civil affairs. Laws pertaining to Greenland’s defense, national security and economy are controlled by policymakers in Denmark. Trump has refused to rule out using economic or even military force to take control of the vast ice-covered territory.
Greenlanders have been debating for a numbers of years whether they would be better off as an independent country, something that could happen if a national referendum is held, which Denmark has said it would allow if enough of the population votes to hold one. Polls have consistently shown that most Greenlanders would prefer to be independent, but only if they don’t lose a standard of living that for now is buttressed by Denmark’s welfare state.
Wikistrat, a global risks consultancy, recently ran a series of simulations aimed at trying understand how the Greenland saga could play out.
In one of the simulations, the U.S. would offer to lease Greenland from Denmark for an extended period or time, similar to what China did with its Hong King territory when it leased it to Britain for 99 years from 1898 to 1997. In another, Greenland would grant what Wikistrat called “minority shares” in its governance to the U.S., primarily in the areas of security and foreign policy. The U.S. would assume about $800 million in annual subsidies now provided by Denmark.
In a third, more aggressive scenario, the U.S. would unilaterally expand its military presence in Greenland, deploying additional troops to the Thule Air Base, upgrade its missile defense systems there and establish new Arctic-capable infrastructure.
It would also impose tariffs on Danish exports and restrictions on Greenlandic trade. This increased U.S. presence, according to Wikistrat, would trigger a forceful response from Russia, which would view the militarization of Greenland as a direct threat to its Arctic interests.
Eventually, under sustained pressure and fearing Russian actions, Denmark would agree to grant the U.S. special status in managing Greenland’s security and foreign affairs, further solidifying the U.S. presence, according to the consultancy.
(This story was updated to fix a typo.)