Donald Trump really wants Greenland.

But why? That’s the question puzzling politicians, analysts, and critics alike — and fueling endless speculation.

Now, a former CIA spy is jumping into the debate.

A former CIA covert operations officer is shedding new light on what many are calling one of the strangest geopolitical storylines in years: Donald Trump’s intensifying push to take control of Greenland — even floating the possibility of military force.

Andrew Bustamante, a former U.S. Air Force officer and CIA operative, says the former president’s interest in the massive Arctic island goes far beyond what’s being publicly acknowledged, and that the real motivations may be hiding in plain sight.

Trump’s tariff threats

The controversy over Greenland escalated recently after Trump threatened to slap tariffs on the United Kingdom and seven other European nations unless the U.S. is allowed to purchase the island, which is currently governed by Denmark.

UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer fired back during a national press conference, calling the tariff threats “wrong” and stressing that only Greenland and Denmark “have the right to decide what happens to the territory.”

Trump, however, has refused to back down. He continues to argue that Greenland is vital for “national security,” ominously warning that the U.S. could acquire it “the easy way” or “the hard way” — language that has raised eyebrows across NATO.

Greenlanders themselves have already rejected the idea of becoming part of the United States, and just one in five Americans support Trump’s efforts to acquire Greenland, according to a new Reuters/Ipsos poll.

A former CIA officer explains

Speaking to The Express, Andrew Bustamante outlined what he believes is truly driving Trump’s fixation with the island, and it has everything to do with power, resources, and the future of the Arctic.

He said: ”American dominance in the Arctic is critical to American primacy. And that’s the argument for Greenland.

The second argument for Greenland is the importance of American economic independence in the use of not only strategic critical use minerals or rare earth minerals, but also critical minerals.

So the minerals that are required for economic development, as well as the rare earth minerals that are required for military advancement and weaponization, both of those exist in Greenland with the benefit of global warming, which is making more and more of Greenland accessible.

So there is a very real American interest in taking some control over the resources that are in Greenland. However, there is no legal, even by American standards, there’s no legal precedent for us to take it by force. So, what does that mean?

I think there’s a very real chance that the United States strikes an economic deal with the independent parties in Greenland that already want independence.”

Trump, for his part, has repeatedly been told that Greenland is not for sale.

A quiet workaround instead?

Rather than a dramatic military or diplomatic showdown, Bustamante believes Washington may pursue a far subtler strategy — one that sidelines Denmark altogether.

He explained: ”So the United States will take control of the parts of Greenland that it wants, and I think it will find a way to do so without undermining NATO.

However, I don’t see an outcome where Denmark is happy. I see an outcome where Greenlanders are happier than, you know, than their parent company or their parent country. But it’s a very difficult, very difficult thing to predict. How fast, in what ways, et cetera. But we can’t, it’s not something that’s just gonna be forgotten.”

According to Bustamante, any attempt to seize Greenland by force would have no legal footing and would shatter U.S. commitments to NATO, yet uncertainty alone may still serve Trump’s agenda.

He added: ”There’s no case for them to try to, you know, break their commitment to NATO by moving aggressively, politically or militarily, against the NATO allied, essentially, protectorate. So it’s a very strange and confusing situation.”

Why Greenland matters so much

Geographically, Greenland sits in a critical position between North America and the Arctic, making it ideal for missile detection systems and maritime surveillance.

But it’s what lies beneath the ice that has experts paying close attention. Greenland is believed to hold vast reserves of uranium, iron, rare earth minerals, and potentially oil and gas — resources that could shape global power for decades to come.

Despite this, Trump has insisted the interest isn’t about minerals, claiming the focus is purely on “national security.”

Earlier this year, JD Vance even visited a U.S. military base in Greenland, fueling speculation that long-term plans may already be underway.

Why the controversy may fade

Bustamante believes Trump understands how the media cycle works — and how to exploit it. He doesn’t expect the Greenland saga to dominate headlines forever, especially if deals are quietly signed out of public view.

As Bustamante put it: ”But right now, he has a chance to basically continue to assert his power, strategic ambiguity because of his demonstration of power in Venezuela, so why not milk that for all it’s worth and make people wonder whether or not they should just kowtow to his demands in Greenland?”