Trump Says He ‘Won’t Use Force’ to Acquire Greenland (Full Text of Trump's 2026 Speech at Davos)

U.S. President Donald Trump on Wednesday spoke for more than an hour at the 2026 World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland. While his meandering remarks touched on multiple familiar topics, including windmills—a longtime personal pet peeve—the state of the U.S. economy, and his long-running 2020 U.S. presidential election denialism, Trump spoke at length about his desire to acquire Greenland from Denmark.

He also strongly criticized NATO and said other members of the Western military alliance have taken advantage of U.S. generosity over the years.

The following is an excerpt from his remarks focusing on Greenland, Denmark, NATO, and U.S. military power.

I was going to leave it out of the speech, but I thought, I think I would have been reviewed very negatively.

I have tremendous respect for both the people of Greenland and the people of Denmark, tremendous respect.

But every NATO ally has an obligation to be able to defend their own territory. And the fact is, no nation or a group of nations is in any position to be able to secure Greenland other than the United States. We’re a great power, much greater than people even understand. I think they found that out two weeks ago in Venezuela.

We saw this in World War II, when Denmark fell to Germany after just six hours of fighting and was totally unable to defend either itself or Greenland. So the United States was then compelled. We did it. We felt an obligation to do it, to send our own forces to hold the Greenland territory—and hold it we did,

Highlights of Trump's Speech:

In 2019, Denmark said that they would spend over $200 million to strengthen Greenland’s defenses. But as you know, they spent less than 1 percent of that amount, 1 percent. There’s no sign of Denmark there. And I say that with great respect for Denmark, whose people I love, whose leaders are very good.

It’s the United States alone that can protect this giant mass of land, this giant piece of ice, develop it, and improve it, and make it so that it’s good for Europe and safe for Europe and good for us. And that’s the reason I’m seeking immediate negotiations to once again discuss the acquisition of Greenland by the United States, just as we have acquired many other territories throughout our history, as many of the European nations have, they’ve acquired, there’s nothing wrong with it. Many of them, some went in reverse, actually, if you look, some had great, vast wealth, great, vast lands all over the world. They went in reverse. They’re stuck back when they started. That happens too, but some grow.

But this would not be a threat to NATO. This would greatly enhance the security of the entire alliance, the NATO alliance. The United States is treated very unfairly by NATO. I want to tell you that, when you think about it, nobody can dispute it. We give so much, and we get so little in return. And I’ve been a critic of NATO for many years, and yet I’ve done more to help NATO than any other president, by far, than any other person. You wouldn’t have NATO if I didn’t get involved in my first term.

What does the United States get out of all this work, all of this money, other than death, destruction, and massive amounts of cash going to people who don’t appreciate what we do? They don’t appreciate what we do. I’m talking about NATO. I’m talking about Europe. They have to work on Ukraine; we don’t. The United States is very far away. We have a big, beautiful ocean separating us. We have nothing to do with it.

Until I came along, NATO was only supposed to pay 2 percent of GDP, but they weren’t paying. Most of the countries weren’t paying anything. The United States was paying for virtually 100 percent of NATO. And I got that stopped. I said, “That’s not fair.” But then, more importantly, I got NATO to pay 5 percent, and now they were paying, and now they are paying. So something nobody said was possible. They said, “We will never go up higher than 2 percent.” But they went to 5 percent, and now they’re paying the 5. They didn’t pay the 2, and now they’re paying the 5, and they’re stronger for it. And they have an excellent, by the way, secretary-general, who’s possibly in the room. Mark [Rutte], are you here?

Yes, he’s here. Hello, Mark.

We never asked for anything, and we never got anything. We probably won’t get anything unless I decide to use excessive strength and force, where we would be, frankly, unstoppable. But I won’t do that.

So what we have gotten out of NATO is nothing, except to protect Europe from the Soviet Union and now Russia. I mean, we’ve helped them for so many years. We’ve never gotten anything, except we pay for NATO, and we paid for many years, until I came along. We paid for, in my opinion, 100 percent of NATO because they weren’t paying their bills.

And all we’re asking for is to get Greenland, including right, title, and ownership, because you need the ownership to defend it. You can’t defend it on a lease. No. 1, legally, it’s not defensible that way, totally. And No. 2, psychologically. Who the hell wants to defend a license agreement or a lease, which is a large piece of ice in the middle of the ocean, where, if there is a war, much of the action will take place on that piece of ice? Think of it. Those missiles will be flying right over the center of that piece of ice.

All we want from Denmark for national and international security and to keep our very energetic and dangerous potential enemies at bay is this land on which we’re going to build the greatest Golden Dome ever built. We’re building a Golden Dome that’s going to, just by its very nature, going to be defending Canada. Canada gets a lot of freebies from us, by the way—they should be grateful also, but they’re not. I watched your prime minister yesterday; he wasn’t so grateful. But they should be grateful to us, Canada. Canada lives because of the United States. Remember that, Mark [Carney], the next time you make your statements.
HE FINALLY ENDS WITH:
So we want a piece of ice for world protection, and they won’t give it. We’ve never asked for anything else, and we could have kept that piece of land, and we didn’t. So they have a choice. You can say yes, and we will be very appreciative, or you can say no, and we will remember.

For the trolls who are new to this story...

He could have gotten the parties speaking by just asking to speak.

He did.

This has been going on since December 2024, before Trump became President for the second time.

December 22, 2024: Donald says it is an "absolute necessity" the US purchases Greenland

BREAKING: Trump says that the US feels 'that the ownership and control of Greenland is an absolute necessity'
Trump:
“For purposes of National Security and Freedom throughout the World, the United States of America feels that the ownership and control of Greenland is an absolute necessity.”

January 6, 2025: Danish king changes 500-year-old coat of arms amid growing row with Trump over Greenland

The King of Denmark has changed the royal coat of arms in a bid to more prominently feature Greenland and the Faroe Islands – a move that many view as warning shot to Donald Trump.
*snip*
The updated design shows the crowns removed and replaced with a polar bear and ram - animals that symbolise Greenland and the Faroe Islands respectively.

January 7, 2025: Danish prime minister has blunt message for Trump: Greenland is not for sale

Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen emphasized that Greenland is not for sale, as President-elect Trump has ramped up calls for the U.S. to acquire the island.
Frederiksen's comments to a Danish TV station come as the president's son, Donald Trump Jr., paid a visit to Greenland on Tuesday. The trip is a personal one and Trump Jr. is not expected to meet with any government officials.
The Danish prime minister said in an interview that Greenlandic Prime Minister Múte Egede "has been very, very clear – that there is a lot of support among the people of Greenland that Greenland is not for sale and will not be in the future either," according to The Hill.

January 7, 2025: Trump refuses to rule out using military force to take Greenland or the Panama Canal

President-elect Donald Trump isn't ruling out using military force in an effort to gain control of Greenland and retake control of the Panama Canal.
During a Tuesday press conference, Trump was asked if he'd assure the world that he wouldn't use military or economic coercion to secure the sovereign territory and the vital waterway, respectively.
The president-elect in his response reinforced the critical economic importance that he sees in Greenland and the Panama Canal.
"I can't assure you," he said. "I'm not going to commit to that. It might be that you'll have to do something."
"We need Greenland for national security purposes," he continued. "People don't even know if Denmark has any legal right to it. But if they do, they should give it up."

January 25, 2025: Trump conveys ‘serious’ and ‘firm’ desire to acquire Greenland in call with Danish PM: ‘Danes now in crisis mode’

President Trump had a “firm” phone conversation with Denmark’s prime minister last week to convey his serious intentions of acquiring Greenland, according to a report citing officials privy to the talk.
Trump has been aggressive in his desire to make Greenland a US territory to bolster national security in the Arctic region — and has even refused to rule out using “military force” to get it.
The Danish government, which has ownership of the largest island in the world, has said Greenland is not for sale and will not be a part of the US.
Trump’s conversation with Danish PM Mette Fredericksen, in which he stood unwavering behind his intentions, did not go well, European sources familiar with the discussion told the Financial Times.

February 16, 2025: Cruz meets with Denmark about US purchase of Greenland

“I got to say the Danish ambassador, they were upset and they were offended and they said, ‘Greenland is not for sale,’ and I laughed, and I said, ‘You know what: everything is for sale,'” Cruz said. “But friends and allies can have conversations about things that are mutual benefits. What I told Denmark is, I said: ‘Ever since the president began talking about this, Greenland’s independence movement has been growing in momentum. And if Greenland declares itself independent of you, Denmark gets nothing.’”

So, parties had met. Discussions were cold. Persistence seems to have changed initial stances.

-PJ

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.