Autori
Marta Thorbjornsen - Senior Researcher Mondo Internazionale G.E.O. Cultura & Società
Simona Chiesa - Senior Researcher Mondo Internazionale G.E.O. Cultura & Società
Giulia Casot - Junior Researcher Mondo Internazionale G.E.O. Cultura & Società
Abstract
This article examines the legacy of Danish colonialism in Greenland and its continued impact on contemporary governance, society, and Indigenous rights. It explores how policies of cultural assimilation, forced child removals, and reproductive control have shaped Greenlandic identity and autonomy. Despite advances through the Home Rule (1979) and Self-Government Acts (2009), Denmark retains control over key areas, and systemic inequalities persist. The piece also addresses the role of climate change, international interest, and Greenland’s resource wealth in renewing calls for full independence.
I. Denmark’s Colonial Legacy in Greenland: Between Benevolence and Control
The history of Greenland is deeply intertwined with that of Denmark, a colonial relationship that continues to shape Greenlandic society today. To fully understand the contemporary dynamics between the two, it is essential to analyze their colonial past, which has profoundly influenced their political, economic, and social structures.
Denmark's formal colonization of Greenland began in the 18th century, though its influence was gradually consolidated through policies of assimilation, linguistic imposition, and resource exploitation. The process of colonization was, in many respects, relatively unopposed. Petersen (1995) attributes this to the absence of centralized political structures beyond the household level within Inuit communities, leaving no dominant authority figures capable of organizing resistance against foreign rule.
Danish colonial rule was characterized by a dual strategy of economic exploitation and cultural intervention. While missionaries sought to eradicate Inuit spiritual practices such as shamanism, deeming them heathen, the Royal Greenland Trading Company promoted hunting, as its profitability depended on acquiring whale and seal blubber for European markets (Graugaard, 2009). This approach reflected Denmark’s paternalistic stance, often described as “positive isolation” or “economic paternalism” (Sørensen, 2007; Nutall, 1992; Loukacheva, 2007). Rooted in Rousseauian ideals of the “Noble Savage,” Greenlanders were portrayed as “free children of nature” who required protection from the corrupting influence of European civilization (Nutall, 1992; Thomsen, 1996).
Denmark’s primary interest in Greenland was economic, driven by mercantile expansion and the pursuit of profitable trade, particularly hunting products. The potential discovery of valuable mineral resources further incentivized Danish control. Despite narratives portraying Greenland as a “deficit colony” - as suggested by the Greenland Commission in 1950 - such assessments failed to account for tax revenues generated by the private cryolite mine in Ivittuut, operational since 1850. This omission challenges the portrayal of Danish rule as purely benevolent (Graugaard, 2009).
Denmark's reputation as a benevolent colonial power played a strategic role during the Cold War. Both the United States and the Soviet Union viewed Denmark as one of the least oppressive colonial rulers, a perception that allowed Denmark to maintain Greenland as part of its territory while securing international goodwill. A pivotal moment in Greenland's political evolution occurred in 1953 when it formally ceased to be a colony and was integrated into the Kingdom of Denmark as a county. However, this constitutional revision was implemented without direct participation from the Greenlandic electorate, as the Danish government consulted only the Greenland Provincial Council. Although Greenland was granted two parliamentary seats in Denmark, this shift reinforced its dependence on Danish administration rather than granting real autonomy (Olesen, 2019).
Between 1953 and the introduction of Home Rule in 1979, Greenland remained under a colonial framework. The 1950s and 1960s saw extensive modernization policies, designed in Copenhagen, which transformed Greenland from a subsistence-based society into one dominated by export industries, particularly fisheries. While this shift integrated Greenland into global markets, it also deepened economic dependence on Denmark (Graugaard, 2009).
Denmark, though not significantly profiting from Greenland in direct economic terms, gained geopolitical advantages and maintained control over resource exploitation. Modernization efforts also involved “Danization” characterized by industrialization, forced resettlements, and the concentration of the population in larger towns and expressed in the two Danish development plans for Greenland, G50 and G60. This disrupted traditional Greenlandic hunting cultures and further entrenched economic dependence. Danish administrative and educational personnel oversaw economic and institutional development, often implementing discriminatory policies that favored Danes over Greenlanders, including privileged access to housing and higher wages. Consequently, the Danish population in Greenland increased from approximately 4% in 1950 to around 20% within a decade (Graugaard, 2009).
The Rise of Greenlandic Nationalism
Culturally, the modernization period led to the widespread adoption of Danish institutions but also heightened social and ethnic divisions. Structural changes, assimilation policies, and the suppression of the Greenlandic language fostered a growing sense of national identity.
By the 1960s and 1970s, a radicalized Greenlandic elite, educated in Denmark, led anti-colonial and anti-imperialist mobilization against Danish rule. This movement, spearheaded primarily by the left-centrist party Siumut, alongside other political groups such as Atassut (center-right) and Inuit Ataqatigiit (leftist), pushed for greater autonomy. After prolonged negotiations, a Home Rule agreement was reached, with 73% of Greenlandic voters supporting self-governance in 1979. While Home Rule granted regional self-administration, Denmark retained control over key areas, including defense, mineral resources, and various public institutions. Danish financial support and expertise continued to shape Greenlandic governance (Graugaard, 2009).
Unlike the aftermath of the 1972 EC referendum, which served as a clear turning point leading to the Home Rule Act, no single event directly triggered the transition to the Self-Government Act. However, during the 1990s, the prospect of full independence gained political traction in Greenland. Greenlanders increasingly embraced a broader notion of self-determination, surpassing the concept of Greenlandification prevalent among most Greenlandic parties in the 1970s Home Rule Commission (Jakobsen, Larsen, 2024).
Following the establishment of Home Rule, a policy of “Greenlandization” was implemented to strengthen the Greenlandic language, cultural identity, and local employment, reducing reliance on Danish expatriates. This shift played a crucial role in shaping Greenland’s pursuit of self-determination, fostering a stronger sense of national identity and political confidence. The gradual transfer of policy areas under Home Rule further reinforced this process, positioning it as a stepping stone toward full independence (Graugaard, 2009).
Additionally, the wave of state formations in Europe following the fall of the Berlin Wall likely influenced Greenlandic aspirations, as it did other independence movements worldwide. By the early 2000s, these factors, combined with the near-completion of policy transfers outlined in the Home Rule Act after two decades, laid the groundwork for the shift to Self-Government (Jakobsen, Larsen, 2024).
Under the 2009 Greenland Self-Government Act (GSGA), Greenland has progressively expanded its competences, building on the 1979 Home Rule Act. While 17 policy areas had already been transferred, an additional three were assumed under the 2009 Act, bringing the total to 20, alongside supplementary areas. The Greenlandic government oversees key sectors, including governance, taxation, fisheries, environmental protection, social and labour policies, education, health, and resource management (Jakobsen, Larsen, 2024).
The Act also outlines functions that may be transferred to Greenlandic authorities upon request, subject to negotiation with Denmark. However, certain matters, such as constitutional affairs, the judiciary, citizenship, monetary policy, defence, and foreign relations, remain under Danish jurisdiction. Despite possessing full taxation authority, Greenland generates only about half of its public revenue, relying on Danish grants for the remainder. This financial dependence limits its de facto autonomy, though the 2009 Act formally grants Greenland the right to seek full independence, reinforcing its legal autonomy (Jakobsen, Larsen, 2024).
However, Greenland's continued economic reliance on Danish financial support and institutional infrastructure underscores the enduring impact of its colonial history on contemporary relations between the two territories (Graugaard, 2009).
II. A History of Discrimination Against Greenlandic Inuit
Colonisation of a land occurs not only through territorial conquest. Overall, to colonise a territory implies to assimilate original habits and customs of the local people to those of the conquerors. Furthermore, assimilation must not be confused with integration. Where the latter calls for mutual respect and comprehension, the former aims at erasing colonised people’s specificities and heritage. Eventually, assimilation leads to homologation and stereotyping. For decades the Danes tried and actually succeeded in this process against the Inuit, the indigenous people of Greenland or Kalaallit Nunaat in Kalaallisut, their mother tongue. Today, not only do the Inuits account for almost 90% of Greenland’s population - while in Denmark they number around 17,000, which is less than 1% of the total Danish population. They also express their own culture, encompassing scientific and technical knowledge of hunting and fishing, through numerous dialects in the North, the East, and the South of Greenland. (UN, 2023)
However, in the past the Danish government disregarded such richness and proceeded to assimilate the Inuits to their own customs. In particular, the former forced the latter to relocate to Denmark. This practice disrupted family ties and consequently interrupted the Inuit cultural transmission chain.
Not even the increased autonomy obtained with both the Home Rule (1979) and the Self-Government Act (2009) could effectively contribute to meaningful changes in the education sector. Indeed, the implementation of Greenlandic education policy keeps suffering from decades of Danish sovereignty and influence on the one hand, and from economic dependence on the other hand. As a result, Kalaallisut could finally be taught in schools, but always in balance with Danish language teachings, which has always been guaranteed access to more resources; and the original Greenlandic mother tongue became the official language of the island only in 2009. (Diotto, 2025).
Discrimination against the Inuits finds undercover application also within Denmark borders, where they keep looking for more qualitative and specific education and health service programs, as well as for better job opportunities and housing, social, and judicial support, which Greenland seems incapable of providing yet. However, despite enjoying formally equal rights, Inuit people keep facing racism and racial discrimination and feel like ‘invisible ghosts’. As a result, Kalaallisut is mandatory taught in Denmark only in municipalities counting at least 12 Inuit children, so basically in very few cases. (UN, 2023) In addition, 5,6% of those children experience out-of-home care away from their parents compared to 1% of their Danish fellows. (Dahl, 2022) This data shows that forced abduction is not over but has rather evolved and is now unfairly justified recalling the principle of the best interests of the child enshrined in the Convention on the Rights of the Child (1989). The concrete outcome is still Greenlandic children relocated to Danish families and forced to live in unfamiliar contexts.
Furthermore, Inuit children’s still critical situation is fed by the poor living conditions often suffered by grown-up Inuits. More Inuit families than Danish ones either live in overcrowded spaces or suffer homelessness. (UN, 2023) Gender inequality plays an influential role in this regard as well as in other daily life contexts.
The Inuits fought long battles to get restored of all suffering experienced because of racial discrimination from the Danes. Nonetheless, illegally abducted Inuit children of yesterday are still waiting for compensation of psychological damages and the Danish government must adopt bolder stances on the recovery and the establishment of cultural heritage and ties. In this regard, it has developed an Action plan for compliance with the United Nations Convention of the Rights of the Child 2023-2030 and announced a new Government Strategy for homeless people in January 2023. (UN, 2023) Overall, it has decided to use culturally adapted parenting tests and in February 2023 it allocated FDKK 7,8 million to foster case management and cooperation in child cases involving Greenlandic families. (Aktar & al., 2023)
III. The 1950s and 60s Experiments: Forced Relocations and Sterilization
The colonial dynamic between these nations was never limited to territory, it was expanded to cultural assimilation and various experiments took place in order to achieve this. For over two centuries, Denmark has implemented policies specifically targeting Greenlandic families and children, many of which are only now coming to light.
Initially, these strategies were driven by religious motives, aiming to convert Inuit populations to Christianity during the 19th century. This effort was led first by the Moravian Church and later by Danish Lutheran missionaries. By the 20th century, these policies evolved into the introduction of formal education in Greenland, which came at a heavy cost—the forced removal of Greenlandic children from their families. Once relocated, these children were placed in Danish boarding schools, where they were prohibited from speaking their native language and stripped of their cultural identity.
The Danish government justified these measures as a means of providing Inuit children with better education and future opportunities. However, by the 1950s, these removals became institutionalized, mirroring assimilationist policies seen in other colonial powers, such as France and Britain (Diotto, 2025).
One of the most distressing strategies organized by the Danish government was the “Little Danes” experiment in the 1950’s. In 1951, twenty-two Greenlandic children, aged five to nine, were forcibly removed from their homes and sent to Denmark to learn Danish. While the original plan was to take orphans, the priests were unable to find enough for the experiment, so sixteen of the children were taken from their parents or extended families instead. The goal was to raise them as "model citizens", the intelligentsia,—a new elite who would serve as a bridge between Danish society and Indigenous Greenlandic communities (John, 2022).
The outcome, however, was one of devastation and loss. These children were severed from their families, their mother tongue, and their homes, ultimately losing their sense of identity. After a year and a half in Denmark, most were returned to Greenland, but rather than being reunited with their families, they were placed in an orphanage run by the Danish Red Cross. There, they remained isolated from Greenlandic society, forbidden to speak their native language, and marginalized within their own homeland (Diotto, 2025).
As adults, many of the children struggled to reintegrate into Greenlandic society and felt the need to return to Denmark, feeling disconnected and alienated. Reports from a previous Danish government indicate that up to half of the group developed mental health issues and substance abuse problems. Today, only six of these individuals remain alive, living out their later years in the shadow of this traumatic past. Denmark issued its first formal apology for the experiment in 2020—69 years later, following increasing pressure from advocacy groups. A year later, facing legal action from survivors, the Danish government agreed to financially compensate the victims (Murray, 2022).
In 1953, Greenland ceased being a colony and was officially integrated into Denmark, leading to increased Danish influence over Greenlandic society. This shift was not only reflected in the establishment of Danish boarding schools but also in the marginalization of the Kalaallisut language and the imposition of Danish as the dominant language. In 1979, Greenland was granted Home Rule, marking a significant step toward autonomy (Diotto, 2025). However, in the decades of the 60’s and 70’s, another deeply harmful experiment took place, which only came to light in 2022, when it was exposed by a Danish public radio podcast.
During this period, thousands of young Greenlandic women, many of them minors, were forcibly subjected to compulsory birth control through the insertion of intrauterine devices (IUDs). Without parental knowledge or consent, schoolgirls were sent to public health offices, where they underwent this invasive and painful procedure. Some were as young as 12 years old, and many later recalled the experience as deeply traumatic and confusing at such a young age. The long-term effects of this policy have been devastating: many of these women have struggled with fertility issues, with evidence suggesting that the younger they were at the time of the procedure, the greater the complications they faced. Given the significant risks associated with IUDs, particularly when inserted without proper medical oversight or patient consent, their complications have a profound impact on the well-being of women. The official justification for the program was to reduce the number of children born out of wedlock in Greenland and to slow the overall birth rate—a policy rooted in deeply colonialist and discriminatory attitudes toward the Inuit population (Eisele, 2025).
Records indicate that at least 4,500 Greenlandic girls and women were subjected to non-consensual IUD insertions between 1966 and 1970, though evidence suggests that these procedures continued throughout the 1970s. When these reports came to light a wave of shock and indignation followed, leading to an investigation on these pregnancy prevention practices in both Greenland and in schools in Denmark with greenlandic students (Murray 2022). Crucially, it is important to underline that Danish girls and young women were not subjected to these procedures. Even in schools in Denmark, only Greenlandic girls were targeted. Between 1966 and 1975, these girls and women became victims of a deeply racialized and gendered policy, coinciding with the emergence of the stereotypical and reductive figure of ‘Grønlænderinden’—a construct that positioned Greenlandic women at the bottom of the colonial racial and social hierarchy (Dyrendom Graugaard et al., 2025). Reports also suggest that similar non-consensual IUD insertions may have resumed in the 1990s and continued into the present day.
An independent investigation conducted by the Danish Institute for Human Rights and the Human Rights Council of Greenland concluded that these forced birth control practices constitute degrading and inhumane treatment, in violation of several international human rights treaties, including the European Convention on Human Rights, the UN Convention against Torture, the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, and the ILO Convention on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (Aktar et al., 2023). Furthermore, Inuit LGBTI and gender-diverse individuals face dual discrimination, both for their Inuit identity and their gender or sexual orientation (UN, 2023).
This adds another layer of profound systemic discrimination, reinforcing the targeting of Inuit communities. When analyzing Denmark’s colonial history with Greenland, a clear pattern of cultural eradication emerges. Tinker proposes a definition of cultural genocide as “the effective destruction of a people by systematically or systemically (intentionally or unintentionally in order to achieve other goals) destroying, eroding, or undermining the integrity of the culture and system of values that defines a people and gives them life.” This definition encapsulates the long-term impact of Danish policies and experiments on Greenlandic society, as many victims have experienced cultural disintegration, loss of identity, and irreversible harm as a direct result of these measures (Kingston, 2015).
However, the revelation of compulsory and non-consensual birth control imposed on minors and young women exposes yet another deeply troubling aspect of this history. Under the United Nations Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, Article II(d) includes “imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group” and Article II(e) “forcibly transferring children of the group to another group” as a form of genocide (United Nations, 1951). Given Denmark’s long-standing policies of forced assimilation and reproductive control, these practices can be viewed as deliberate attempts to diminish the Inuit population.
In 2023, following the public revelation of this experimeny, a group of affected women sought compensation from the Danish government. However, their request remains unanswered, as the Danish Health Ministry has stated that an independent investigation must first be conducted to determine the full scope of the cases and the decision-making process behind the campaign, which was framed as a "modernization" effort to reduce poverty (Gronholt-Pedersen, 2024).
IV. The “Parenting Competency” Tests: A Policy of Control and Discrimination
The transition from a colony to Home Rule in 1979, and later to Self-Rule in 2009, brought significant changes for Greenland. These milestones allowed the island to regain control over key domestic affairs, including healthcare, education, the judicial system, and the reestablishment of Kalaallisut as the official language. However, deep-rooted challenges persist, as the legacy of centuries of assimilation policies continues to shape contemporary Greenlandic society, contributing to identity struggles and intergenerational trauma (Diotto, 2025).
Furthermore, the Danish influence over Greenlandic families, customs, and traditions did not vanish and indeed, children’s illegal abduction still occurs, although through subtler means. This is particularly done through the “Parental Competency Assessments” or FKU, in Danish acronym.
These assessments, designed and implemented by Danish authorities, play a crucial role in child welfare interventions, including decisions to remove children from parental custody. They evaluate a parent's ability to raise their child by examining their background, mental health, and support system through questionnaires, interviews, and observation. The assessment includes a personality test, an IQ test, the Reading the Mind in the Eyes (RME) test—which measures a parent’s ability to interpret emotional expressions—a test for mental and personality disorders, and another that evaluates empathy and mentalization skills (Danish Institute for Human Rights, 2022).
However, these tests were created in Western countries for Western populations, specifically Danish citizens, and are inherently adapted to Danish language and culture. Since the 1970s, studies have shown that IQ tests consistently misclassify Indigenous parents, often portraying them as intellectually deficient. Similarly, the emotional recognition tests fail to account for cultural differences in how Danes and Inuit individuals express emotions. Due to their Eurocentric perspective and inherent biases, these assessments disregard crucial aspects of Inuit parenting, which emphasizes collective caregiving and community-based child-rearing. Danish evaluators frequently deem Inuit parents unfit simply because they may struggle to express emotions in a language other than Kalaallisut, implicitly positioning Danish language and culture as superior (Diotto, 2025). As a result, statistics indicate that Greenlandic children in Denmark are disproportionately placed into foster care, with up to 6% of native Greenlandic children living in foster homes or institutional care, compared to just 1% of Danish children (Marsden, 2025). These children are once again at risk of losing their identity and cultural heritage, facing forced linguistic and cultural assimilation. This demonstrates how parenting competency tests rely on arbitrary criteria that fail to respect Inuit culture and identity, focusing instead on rigid psychometric evaluations that do not reflect Indigenous parenting norms (UN, 2023).
The controversial use of parental competency tests gained international attention after a video circulated on social media showing Keira Kronvold, a Greenlandic mother, having her newborn forcibly removed just two hours after giving birth. Kronvold was reportedly asked to retake the FKU test to determine whether she was "civilized enough" to raise her child. She failed the assessment due to her “Greenlandic background, where even small facial expressions have communicative significance, which would make it difficult for her to prepare the child for the social expectations and codes necessary in Danish society” (Bryant, 2024).
This was not the first time Kronvold had experienced such a devastating separation. Kronvold first took the FKU test after the birth of her second child, and eight months later, both he and her nine-year-old daughter were permanently taken from her custody. After giving birth to her third child, she was granted only one hour of supervised visitation per week. Defending herself, she stated: “I was coldly assessed as a parent. I had grown up between two worlds, proud of my Greenlandic heritage, yet often sidelined by a system that measured my value through a lens that barely recognized our culture” (Bryant, 2024). Keira’s first language is Kalaallisut, and she is not fluent in Danish—a factor that plays a crucial role in interactions between Danish caseworkers and Greenlandic families, especially given that these psychological evaluations are conducted by Danish-speaking psychologists (Marsden, 2025).
While Kronvold’s case is just one among many, it was this viral incident that ignited widespread protests and international scrutiny. Human rights organizations had long condemned the FKU tests as culturally inappropriate and discriminatory against Greenlandic parents and other minority groups. In response to the public outcry, Aqqaluaq B. Egede, Greenland’s Minister for Children, held an urgent meeting with Denmark’s Minister of Social Affairs, Sophie Hæstorp Andersen. Following this meeting, Andersen announced that municipalities would be advised to discontinue the use of these tests, though she stopped short of implementing an outright ban (Nilsson-Julien, 2025).
In January 2025, the Danish and Greenlandic governments finally reached a joint agreement to discontinue the use of standardized psychological assessments in cases concerning parental competency and child placement (High North News, 2025). Interestingly, this long-overdue change was largely influenced by heightened tensions between Denmark and Greenland, exacerbated by Donald Trump’s 2019 proposal to purchase Greenland for the United States. This joint solution proposed an alternative system—a specialized unit with Greenlandic cultural expertise, which will assist municipalities in child welfare cases moving forward (Bryant, 2025).
This policy shift was necessary and long overdue, yet the circumstances surrounding it raise questions about Denmark’s motivations. It appears that Trump’s unusual proposition may have inadvertently pressured Denmark into adopting a more conciliatory stance toward Greenland. However, addressing historical injustices requires more than policy adjustments. Despite Denmark recognizing Greenlandic Inuit as an Indigenous people, no legal framework exists to affirm their specific Indigenous rights, and it is not clear who such rights would apply to if it were to be established. Unlike Inuit communities in Alaska and Canada, who are formally recognized as members of federally acknowledged tribes or Inuit Treaty Organizations, Greenlandic Inuit hold Danish citizenship without any distinct legal status. This lack of recognition leaves them in an uncertain position compared to their counterparts in North America. Without a legal framework that grants Greenlanders greater control over Inuit child welfare policies in Denmark, Inuit children are likely to continue being overrepresented in the child welfare system, regardless of the standards used to evaluate their parents (Argetsinger, 2024).
V. When Greenland became a commodity again: How Trump’s offer changed everything
Greenland or Kalaallit Nunaat’s richness lies not only on traditional culture and heritage, but also on natural resources, ranging from gold, nickel and zinc to rare earth and uranium, the latter actually in the size of the world’s largest deposits. (Cullen, 2023) This abundance has recently regained the stage, when US President Donald Trump expressed his will of buying the island with the precise goal of exploiting those resources, made increasingly available by the larger amount of melting ice due to temperatures rising three times faster in the island than elsewhere.
Trump’s pretension is irrespective of any basic principle of international law, which on the one hand guarantees sovereign States the right of exclusive control over territorial resources; and on the other hand states that colonised people are entitled of the right to self-determination. However, US President’s assertion is not grounded only on his fantasy.
Greenland has indeed a long history of adaptation to environmental change, made manifest by Inuits’ capacity of renovating their fishing, hunting, and harvesting techniques to face rising temperatures, melting ices and biodiversity loss. They were thus capable of preserving the richness of natural resources of the island while fostering its renovation. They could not employ those resources for their own wellbeing and growth, though. The Danes exploited them without asking for Inuits’ prior consent; instead, the former used forced relocations to free lands of the presence of the latter and eventually carry out military activities, the waste of which were agreed to be removed only in 2018.
Today, these actions can account for violations of indigenous’ rights as enshrined in the UN Declarations on the Rights of Indigenous People, (UN, 2023) disregarding the opinion of a small number of legal scholars arguing that Inuits do not fall upon the definition of indigenous people anymore but rather stopped constituting a minority when Greenland started obtaining partial autonomy. On the contrary, the majority of international law professionals fully includes Inuits within the legal category of ‘indigenous’, if nothing because they share with other populations encompassed in the same group the harmful effects of climate change. (Cullen, 2023) Indeed, the loss of social cohesion impacts them all more negatively than it may impact continental people, who do not usually experience poor commuting systems. (Fusco, 2019) Instead, the Inuits commute to their mainland mainly by boat and travel across ice: the former is now influenced by abrupt changes of water levels and land instability, while the latter is considered to have become more dangerous by 79% of the population due to high temperatures. (Cullen, 2023) These difficulties add to an already unpleasant economic and social landscape, featured by a housing crisis impossible to solve through the use of local natural resources, which are too frail for building construction and consequently lead to use of imported materials, higher costs and almost absent investments. (Cullen, 2023)
Paradoxically, though, climate change may turn out useful to gain Kalaallit Nunaat’s economic independence from the Danish government, which yearly sends to the island €580 million in grants. (Castellucci, 2025) Indeed, not only has the last ‘green’ government of Simiut and Inuit Ataqatigiit (Inuit Community) been slowly shifting away from its environmental stances to at least consider opening new mines to exploit mineral reserves. As other internationally relevant actors did, it also studied the benefits of exploring the new commercial routes becoming increasingly available right because of ice melting. In this way, new job opportunities may be created on the island and fish trade and tourism could expand alongside new cultivations in southern warmer areas. (Cullen, 2023) The government of Greenland has already agreed to ask for Inuits prior consent before adopting and implementing such expansive policies, (UN, 2023) including expanding Nuuk’s airport capacity to host flights from and to New York starting in the summer of 2026. (Milne, 2025) However, this opportunity for local economic and social growth must be carefully balanced with the need to keep protecting biodiversity. Otherwise, the risk would be to decrease Kalaallit Nunaat’s export-import of ocean fish, currently accounting for 90%, due to the changed migratory pattern of ocean fishes. Adopting an unbalanced approach could also impoverish about three-quarters of Inuits’ typical diet, mainly based on the wild hunt of caribou and reindeer. Greenlandics’ dietary habits are already transforming, because ice melting frees contaminants and waste, radioactive ones included, that eventually reach traditional food sources or prevent proper food storage. Just like other Indigenous people before, Inuits have started buying more expensive and processed imported foods sold in supermarkets, causing health and social problems for both individuals and the whole community. (Cullen, 2023)
Overall, the intensifying dreadful backlashes of climate change recalled the conception of Greenland as a commodity suitable for appropriation, as not so subtly implied in Trump’s assertion. The US President repeated vehemently his assertion even just ahead of the recently held elections for the renovation of the Inatsisartut, the local Parliament. Although he did so clearly for the untold goal of becoming the next unofficial coloniser of the island, Trump was not alone in claiming in favour of its independence. Every party, the unionist Atassut (Solidarity) included, put the question of independence or at least higher degrees of autonomy at the centre of its own electoral programme too.
The reason beyond such intent goes back to decades, when Greenland started being recognised partial autonomy. Despite the formalities, today not only Kalaallit Nunaat’s authorities can exercise their exclusive decision-making power in fields such as hunting, fishing, electricity and water, and natural resources only when their positions do not contrast with Danes’ one, which causes also ambiguity on who to deem effectively responsible for policy implementation. In addition, the difficulties of properly managing Intuis’ knowledge adaptation and mitigation strategies through local decision-making processes hinder the possible positive outcomes of these practices. (Cullen, 2023) If their long-lasting expertise keeps helping face the harmful impacts of global warming on their daily lives and preserving biodiversity, especially in the protected areas identified by the Greenlandic government, (UN, 2023) it is uncertain for how long Inuits’ adaptation capacity will be able to keep pace with an increasingly fast climate change. Not even the composition of Greenland Parliament can ascertain that its policies are tailored to Inuits’ only wellbeing: although only Inuits seat in it, politicians are always representatives of the entirety of their electorate, including Danish citizen residing on the island longer than six months and thus eligible and entitled to vote; nor is there a specific procedure collecting their prior consent. (Cullen, 2023)
Despite the common objective, parties do not agree on the path to follow towards independence and discrepancies exist even within parties themselves. Some Simiut’s exponents would rather radically cut any tie with the Danish government than follow the smoother approach of Demokraatit (Democrats), focused on a long-period agreement based on higher standards of economic and social development and stability. (Starcevic, 2025) That minority is closer to Naleraq’s nationalist positions, clearly expressed in its demand for secession as well as in the appreciation for the capacity of Trump’s declarations to both speed up the process towards independence and provide better prospects for Intuis’ security and development. Alongside internal struggles, parties’ candidates must face external divisions too: the eastern part of the island feels abandoned by the western side and sees in Greenlandic rather than in Danish authorities the main culprits of their sufferent living (Castellucci, 2025)
Eventually, the elections were won by the center-right Demokraatit party with about 30% of total votes of the only constituency set up in Nuuk, but it did not reach an absolute majority, that is, 16 parliamentary seats out of 31. Furthermore, just while its leader Jens-Frederik Nielsen overtly defined Trump’s statement as a “threat to our political independence”, which the party aims at obtaining through gradual steps, the pro-US Naleraq party gained double votes compared to those of 2021 elections, ranking second place. (Starcevic, 2025) Considering also the difficulties added by the island’s partially unclear legal position, partially blurring the application of either national or international law, the goal would be for the newly elected authorities to avoid any time-consuming discussion and reduce negotiations to the essentials to then rapidly agree on how to best implement the path towards independence. Only in this way will Greenland effectively get the full capacity to decide whether to strategically share its own natural resources or not with foreign partners; not out of surrender to Trump’s intimidatory assertions, but out of national will.
VI. What’s Next for Greenland and Denmark?
Greenland has enjoyed a certain degree of political autonomy for over forty years, initially through a thirty-year period of Home Rule, followed by the implementation of Self-Government in 2009. However, the evolution of Greenlandic self-governance has not followed a linear process of policy transfer but has instead been characterized by gradual progress and occasional stagnation.
At the heart of this struggle for autonomy lies Denmark’s persistent influence over Greenland’s defense, foreign policy, and economy. Despite some advancements, Greenland has only assumed direct control over two new areas since 2009: mineral resources and offshore workplace safety regulations. The management of mineral resources, in particular, has been a point of contention, especially regarding the extraction of strategic minerals such as uranium. A subsequent agreement established that Greenland could decide on uranium production, while Denmark retained control over its export (Jakobsen, Larsen, 2024).
This situation highlights the legacy of colonialism and the deep structural dependencies that continue to shape Greenland’s economic and political landscape. Historically, the island’s transition from a self-sufficient Inuit hunting community to an economy dependent on Danish imports has reinforced its reliance on the former colonial power. These economic dependencies are further compounded by psychological and political scars left by colonial rule, which continue to hinder Greenland’s full emancipation. While the territory has been formally recognized as having the right to self-determination, the ongoing debate centers on whether and when it could achieve economic sustainability sufficient to support full independence. The 2019 proposal by U.S. President Donald Trump to purchase Greenland exposed the precarious nature of its economic situation, with some Greenlandic leaders viewing American interest as an opportunity to reduce dependence on Denmark and redefine their relationship with their former colonizer (Jakobsen, Larsen, 2024).
Greenland’s growing political assertion is further reflected in its increasing demand for involvement in foreign and security policy decisions. Following criticism of Denmark’s failure to consult on strategic matters, the Contact Committee was established in 2021 between the three parts of the Kingdom of Denmark to ensure greater Greenlandic participation. However, despite these efforts, structural inequalities persist, reinforcing the lasting impact of colonial policies (Jakobsen, Larsen, 2024).
Beyond economic and political challenges, colonialism has also left a profound social impact on Greenlandic society, particularly in the form of a mental health crisis. The island has one of the highest suicide rates in the world, a crisis deeply intertwined with the loss of cultural identity following decolonization (Barca, 2025).
Between 1980 and 2018, Greenland recorded an average suicide rate of 96 per 100,000 people annually, among the highest globally. However, this has not always been the case. A 2023 study published in BMC Psychiatry found that large-scale suicides in Greenland only emerged from the 1960s onward, coinciding with the rapid modernization and westernization of the island. The rate escalated sharply, peaking at 120 suicides per 100,000 in 1989, before stabilizing at an average of 80 (Seidler, Tolstrup, Bjerregaard, Crawford, Viskum Lytken Larsen, 2023).
The crisis disproportionately affects young people, particularly young men, with regional variations shifting over time. Today, the highest rates are found in East and North Greenland, while Nuuk has seen a decline—from over 150 per 100,000 annually in the 1980s to approximately 60 since the 2000s. Despite several government-led initiatives, including suicide prevention campaigns and crisis helplines, the problem persists. Research suggests that the transformation of Greenlandic society—from an Inuit fishing and hunting community to an economy reliant on external imports and Western influences—has played a pivotal role in this mental health crisis, further underscoring the enduring consequences of colonial rule (Barca, 2025).
Ultimately, Greenland’s struggle for greater autonomy cannot be understood in purely political or economic terms; it is also a deeply social issue. The intersection of historical injustices, economic dependence, and cultural dislocation continues to shape the present, influencing both Greenland’s political trajectory and the well-being of its people (Jakobsen, Larsen, 2024).
While the Greenland Self-Government Act (GSGA) outlines a framework for a gradual transfer of power, the key question remains: can Greenland overcome the structural barriers imposed by its colonial past to achieve true self-sufficiency, both as a nation and as a society?
Bibliography
Aktar M., Filskov N., Storgaard Carlsen K., Ventegodt M. (2023). Human Rights in Focus - Report to Inatsisartut 2022-23, Danish Institute for Human Rights and Denmark’s and Greenland's National Human Rights Institution [online], available at https://www.humanrights.dk/files/media/document/HUMAN%20RIGHTS%20IN%20FOCUS%20%E2%80%93%20REPORT%20TO%20INATSISARTUT%202022-23_accessible.pdf [last consulted: 05/03/2025]. B-1
Argetsinger, B. (2024, February 19). A view from Greenland about forced child removal as Greenlanders protest Danish welfare services. Arctic Today. https://www.arctictoday.com/a-view-from-greenland-about-forced-child-removal-as-greenlanders-protest-danish-welfare-services/ B-2
Barca, A. J. (2025). Greenland: The lands of suicides. El País - International [online], available at https://english.elpais.com/international/2025-01-25/greenland-the-land-of-suicides.html [last consulted: 20/03/2025]. B-2
Bryant, M. (2024, November 25). Danish parenting tests under scrutiny after baby removed from Greenlandic mother. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/nov/25/danish-parenting-tests-baby-removed-from-greenlandic-mother B-2
Bryant, M. (2025, January 20). Denmark to ditch parenting competency tests for Greenlandic families. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/jan/20/denmark-to-ditch-parenting-competency-tests-for-greenlandic-families B-2
Cali-Tsay, F. (2023). Visit to Denmark and Greenland. 1-10 February 2023. End of Mission Statement, United Nations Human Rights Special Procedures [online], available at https://www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/documents/issues/indigenouspeoples/sr/statements/eom-statement-denmark-greenland-sr-indigenous-2023-02-10.pdf [last consulted: 05/03/2025]. A-1
Castellucci, M. (2025, March 9). Come si fa campagna elettorale in un posto come la Groenlandia, Il Post [online], available at https://www.ilpost.it/2025/03/09/elezioni-groenlandia/ [last consulted: 10/03/2025]. B-1
Cullen, M. (2023, January 23). Climate Change, Colonialism, and Human Rights in Greenland, Petra Butler and Jean-Pierre Gauci (eds), Human Rights and Small States (forthcoming, Springer) [online], available at https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4041988 [last consulted: 05/03/2025]. C-2
Dahl, K. M. (2022, May 24). Børn med grønlandsk baggrund, der er anbragt i Danmark – fra danske kommuner, VIVE - The Danish Center for Social Science Research [online], available at https://www.vive.dk/da/udgivelser/boern-med-groenlandsk-baggrund-der-er-anbragt-i-danmark-fra-danske-kommuner-ov9leyvn/ [last consulted: 05/03/2025] B-2
Danish Institute for Human Rights. (2022). Testing parenting competencies of Greenlanders in Denmark. https://www.humanrights.dk/publications/testing-parenting-competencies-greenlanders-denmark A-1
Diotto, C. (2025, January 14). A colonial legacy, SAFI [online], available at https://safi-network.org/blog/a-colonial-legacy/ [last consulted: 05/03/2025]. C-2
Dyrendom Graugaard N., Pihl Sørensen V. E., Lee Stage J.. (2025, January 8). Colonial Reproductive Coercion and Control in Kalaallit Nunaat: Racism in Denmark’s IUD Program, NORA - Nordic Journal of Feminist and GEnder Research [online], available at https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/08038740.2024.2427817?src=exp-la [last consulted: 05/03/2025]. B-2
Eisele, I. (2025, January 15). Greenland and Denmark relations: A history of scandals and struggles. DW. https://www.dw.com/en/greenland-denmark-relations-scandals/a-71448548 B-2
Fusco, S. (2019). The legal position of Inuit in the exploitation of natural resources in Greenland, Faculty of Law-School of Humanities and Social Sciences University of Akureyri [online], available at https://skemman.is/handle/1946/33941 [last consulted: 08/03/2025]. C-2
Graugaard, N. D. (2009, May). National Identity in Greenland in the Age of Self-Government. Centre for the Critical Study of Global Power and Politics [online], available at https://patternwhichconnects.com/lib/articles_files/Graugaard095.pdf [last consulted: 20/03/2025]. B-2
Gronholt-Pedersen, J. (2024, March 4). Greenland women take Denmark to court over historical involuntary birth control. Reuters. https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/greenland-women-take-denmark-court-over-historical-involuntary-birth-control-2024-03-04/ B-2
High North News. (2025, January 22). Denmark and Greenland agree on solution for parenting test. https://www.highnorthnews.com/en/denmark-and-greenland-agree-solution-parenting-test B-2
Jakobsen, U. Larsen, H. (2024). The development of Greenland’s self-government and independence in the shadow of the unitary state. The Polar Journal. Vol 14, No 1, 9 - 27. Department of Political Science, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denma. [Online], available at https://doi.org/10.1080/2154896X.2024.2342117 B-2
John, T. (2022, January). The lost children of Denmark’s Arctic experiment. CNN. https://edition.cnn.com/interactive/2022/01/world/greenland-denmark-social-experiment-cmd-idnty-intl-cnnphotos/ B-2
Kingston, L. (2015). The destruction of identity: Cultural genocide and indigenous peoples. The International Journal of Human Rights, 19(1), 53–72. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/14754835.2014.886951 B-2
Loukacheva, N. (2007). The Arctic Promise: legal and political autonomy of Greenland and Nunavut. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. B-2
Marsden, S. (2025, January 10). The racist parenting test fueling Denmark-Greenland tensions. The Week. https://theweek.com/world-news/the-racist-parenting-test-fuelling-denmark-greenland-tensions B-2
Milne, R. (2025, March 12). Greenland party favouring gradual independence wins elections, Financial Times [online], available at https://www.ft.com/content/d0c96260-a5d1-42a1-b13f-735a9e1ab68f [last consulted: 12/03/2025]. A-1
Murray, A. (2022, March 9). Denmark says sorry to children of failed experiment, BBC [online], available at https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-60646898 [last consulted: 05/03/2025]. B-2
Murray, J. (2022, September 27). Denmark apologises to Greenlanders taken for social experiment. BBC News. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-63049387 B-2
Nilsson-Julien, R. (2025, January 21). Denmark abandons controversial parenting competency tests used on Greenlanders. Euronews. https://www.euronews.com/2025/01/21/denmark-abandons-controversial-parenting-competency-tests-used-on-greenlanders B-2
Nuttall, M. (1992). Arctic Homeland: Kinship Community, and Development in Northwest Greenland. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. B-1
Olesen, S. M. (2019). The Danish decolonisation of Greenland, 1945-54. [online], available at https://nordics.info/show/artikel/the-danish-decolonisation-of-greenland-1945-54-1 [last consulted: 20/03/2025]. B-2
Petersen, R. (1995). Colonialism as seen from a former colonized area. Arctic Anthropology, 32(2), 118-126. B-1
Seidler, I. K. Tolstrup, J. S. Bjerregaard, P. Crawford, A. Viskum Lytken Larsen, C. (2023, March). Time trends and geographical patterns in suicide among Greenland Inuit. BMC Psychiatry [online], available at https://bmcpsychiatry.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12888-023-04675-2 [last consulted: 20/03/2025]. B-1
Sørensen, A. K. (2007). Denmark-Greenland in the Twentieth Century. University of Copenhagen: Museum Tusculanum Press. B-2
Starcevic, S. (2025, March 12). Greenland election results: Center-right opposition wins amid Trump saber-rattling, Politico [online], available at https://www.politico.eu/article/greenland-boosts-center-right-and-pro-independence-parties-in-crucial-election/ [last consulted: 12/03/2025]. B-1
Thomsen, H. (1996). Between Traditionalism and Modernity. In Cultural and Social Research in Greenland 95/96 : Essays in Honour of Robert Petersen (pp. 265-278). B-2
United Nations General Assembly (2007, September 13). UN Declarations on the Rights of Indigenous People, UN [online], available at https://www.un.org/development/desa/indigenouspeoples/wp-content/uploads/sites/19/2018/11/UNDRIP_E_web.pdf [last consulted: 08/03/2025]. A-1
United Nations. (1951). Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. United Nations Office on Genocide Prevention. https://www.un.org/en/genocideprevention/documents/atrocity-crimes/Doc.1_Convention%20on%20the%20Prevention%20and%20Punishment%20of%20the%20Crime%20of%20Genocide.pdf A-1