Trump’s Grand Dream: Can Greenland and Canada Join the U.S.?

There’s one topic Donald Trump keeps circling back to: the notion of incorporating Greenland and Canada into

the United States. This idea sparks a few questions: Could Trump actually pull this off? What would happen if the U.S. absorbed Greenland and Canada? And how long will Trump’s “buying spree” persist? Let’s explore the answers together.

Hold on a second. When an American president starts talking about “national security,” it’s wise to keep an eye on your wallets—trouble often follows. After Trump’s remarks, the fate of Greenland and Canada turned into a global curiosity. Naturally, both governments responded with a firm rebuttal: “We’re not for sale!”

Let’s begin with Greenland. Denmark’s 1953 Constitution transformed Greenland into a Danish county, granting it representation in the Folketing, Denmark’s parliament. That same law gave Greenland the right to declare independence unilaterally through a referendum. Polls show that over half of Greenlanders favor independence, and they even pegged 2021—the 300th anniversary of Danish rule—as a potential year for it. Yet, it hasn’t happened.

Now, let’s step away from reality for a moment and weigh the possibilities. Could the U.S. technically purchase and integrate Canada and Greenland? Yes, it’s feasible. History offers examples of regions the U.S. has bought and absorbed:

• Louisiana Purchase: In 1803, amid economic struggles and a rebellion in Haiti, Napoleonic France sold the Louisiana region to the U.S. for $15 million—828,000 square miles of land. This deal doubled the U.S.’s size and paved the way for westward expansion.

• Florida: Spain, unable to defend Florida, ceded it to the U.S. for $5 million via the Adams-Onís Treaty. In exchange, the U.S. relinquished claims to Texas, and Spain settled its debts.

• Gadsden Purchase: For $10 million paid to Mexico, the U.S. acquired southern Arizona and New Mexico, securing flat land for the Transcontinental Railroad and resolving border tensions.

• Alaska: Russia sold Alaska to the U.S. for $7.2 million—about $125 million today. Mocked at first, the deal proved a strategic triumph with the discovery of gold and oil.

• Virgin Islands: During World War I, Denmark sold these Caribbean islands to the U.S. for $25 million to enable a naval base. They remain U.S. territory, though not a state.

These transactions were diplomatic deals driven by money and expansionist goals. Territories gained through war or annexation, like Texas and Hawaii, fall outside this pattern.

So why does the U.S. eye Greenland? Strategically, its Arctic location offers military and economic perks. It acts as a buffer against Russia and China’s growing regional influence while boasting rich resources—oil, gas, rare minerals—and new trade routes unlocked by melting ice. The existing Thule Air Base further fuels U.S. interest in cementing its dominance there.

Canada’s case is distinct. The U.S. sees it as a military buffer against Russia, with economic allure in its oil, minerals, and timber Reserves. Heavy trade ties and geographic proximity make merging logistically appealing. Historically, the idea of absorbing Canada ties back to American expansionism, notably the 19th-century “Manifest Destiny” doctrine, which deemed U.S. dominance over North America as natural and inevitable. Though this notion has surfaced occasionally, it’s remained more speculative than actionable.

What if Trump succeeds? Currently, the U.S. is the world’s third-largest country by land area. Acquiring Canada would vault it past Russia to number one. Add Greenland, and this “superstate” would be 22% larger than Russia, dwarfing the European Union to a fifth of its size. But the real game-changer isn’t land—it’s resources. Together, the U.S. and Canada produce 18 million barrels of oil daily, nearly double Russia’s output. In natural gas, the U.S. already leads globally; Canada would widen that gap. Freshwater reserves would also soar, with Canada and the U.S. controlling the world’s largest share, topped off by Greenland’s melting glaciers.

Trump’s vision raises eyebrows, but history shows the U.S. has turned far-fetched purchases into reality before. Whether this ambition becomes policy or fades as rhetoric, the implications are colossal.