In a stunning display of political theater that would be comical if it weren’t so concerning, Representative Buddy Carter (R-GA) has introduced a bill that would authorize President Donald Trump to acquire Greenland and rename it “Red, White, and Blueland”1. This proposal is not just wildly unrealistic; it’s a dangerous distraction from real issues and a troubling sign of how disconnected some of our elected officials have become from geopolitical realities.
A Misguided Proposal
Carter’s bill, dubbed the Red, White, and Blueland Act of 2025, would give Trump the power to enter negotiations with Denmark to purchase Greenland2. It even goes so far as to mandate that all federal documents be updated within six months to reflect this farcical new name5. The sheer audacity of this proposal is breathtaking. It’s as if Carter believes that international relations can be conducted like a real estate transaction, with sovereign nations and their people treated as mere commodities to be bought and sold.
This bill is not just misguided; it’s an insult to the people of Greenland and Denmark. Greenland is an autonomous territory within the Kingdom of Denmark, with its own government and a population of about 56,000 people, mostly Inuit34. These are not pawns to be moved around on a geopolitical chessboard at the whim of U.S. politicians. They have their own culture, traditions, and aspirations for self-determination.
Ignoring Greenlandic Sovereignty
Carter’s proposal completely disregards Greenland’s move towards independence. The 2009 Greenland Self-Government Act expanded Greenland’s responsibilities and gave Greenlanders the right to declare independence from Denmark34. Most Greenlanders support eventual independence, even though economic reliance on Danish subsidies complicates this goal. By treating Greenland as a piece of property to be acquired, Carter’s bill shows a stunning disregard for the principles of self-determination that the United States claims to champion.
Diplomatic Blunder
This bill is not just unrealistic; it’s a diplomatic disaster. Denmark has repeatedly stated that Greenland is not for sale24. Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen has called the idea of selling Greenland “absurd.” By continuing to push this narrative, Carter and his allies are needlessly straining relations with a long-standing NATO ally. This kind of behavior makes the United States look foolish on the world stage and undermines our credibility in international affairs.
Misunderstanding Greenland’s Strategic Importance
While Greenland does have strategic importance, Carter’s approach completely misses the mark. Greenland’s location makes it valuable for missile defense and monitoring Russian naval activities42. The United States already maintains a presence at Pituffik Space Base under a 1951 agreement with Denmark. Instead of seeking to buy Greenland outright, a more productive approach would be to strengthen existing partnerships and cooperation with Denmark and Greenland.
The Resource Rush Fallacy
Carter’s bill seems to be motivated in part by Greenland’s mineral wealth, including rare earth elements crucial for green technology42. However, this simplistic view ignores the significant challenges of resource extraction in Greenland. The harsh Arctic environment, lack of infrastructure, and high operating costs make many projects economically unfeasible43. Moreover, Greenland’s government has shown a commitment to sustainable development, banning uranium mining and stopping new oil and gas exploration licenses43.
Environmental Concerns
The bill’s proponents seem to view Greenland’s melting ice sheet as an opportunity rather than a crisis. This short-sighted perspective ignores the catastrophic global consequences of Arctic ice melt. Greenland’s ice sheet contains enough water to raise global sea levels by 24 feet43. Instead of seeking to exploit this vulnerable region, we should be focusing on mitigating climate change and its impacts.
Cultural Insensitivity
The proposed name change to “Red, White, and Blueland” is not just silly; it’s culturally insensitive. Greenland has a rich Inuit culture with traditions dating back thousands of years44. The country’s name in Greenlandic, “Kalaallit Nunaat,” means “Land of the Greenlanders.” To erase this name in favor of a jingoistic American moniker shows a complete disregard for Greenlandic culture and identity.
A Distraction from Real Issues
Perhaps the most frustrating aspect of Carter’s bill is that it distracts from real and pressing issues facing both the United States and Greenland. The United States is grappling with significant domestic challenges, from healthcare and education to infrastructure and climate change. Greenland, meanwhile, is dealing with the impacts of climate change, working towards economic diversification, and navigating its path towards greater autonomy or independence.
The Geopolitical Reality
Carter’s bill ignores the complex geopolitical realities of the Arctic region. The Arctic has generally been an area of international cooperation, but climate change, resource competition, and growing militarization have raised tensions in recent years43. Russia’s actions in Ukraine have further complicated Arctic relations. In this context, unilateral attempts by the U.S. to “acquire” Greenland are not just unrealistic; they’re potentially destabilizing.
A More Productive Approach
Instead of pursuing this misguided attempt to buy Greenland, the United States should focus on strengthening its existing partnerships in the Arctic. This could include:
- Enhancing cooperation with Denmark and Greenland on Arctic security issues.
- Investing in Arctic research and climate change mitigation efforts.
- Supporting sustainable economic development in Greenland that respects local wishes and environmental concerns.
- Engaging in multilateral forums like the Arctic Council to address shared challenges in the region.
The Mockery of Democracy
Perhaps the most concerning aspect of Carter’s bill is what it says about the state of our democracy. That a sitting member of Congress would introduce such a bill raises serious questions about the quality of representation in our government. Are our elected officials so out of touch with reality that they believe such proposals are a good use of legislative time and resources?
The Danish Response
The absurdity of Carter’s proposal is perhaps best illustrated by the Danish response. In a satirical counter-move, Danish citizens have launched a “Denmarkification” campaign to buy California from the U.S., proposing to rename Disneyland as “Hans Christian Andersenland”39. This humorous response highlights how ridiculous Carter’s proposal appears to our allies.
Rep. Buddy Carter’s bill to rename Greenland “Red, White, and Blueland” is more than just a misguided proposal; it’s a symptom of a deeper problem in American politics. It represents a dangerous mix of ignorance, arrogance, and disregard for international norms and the rights of other peoples. It’s a throwback to an era of colonialism that the world has long since rejected.
As Americans, we should expect more from our elected officials. We need representatives who understand the complexities of international relations, respect the sovereignty of other nations, and focus on addressing real issues rather than engaging in geopolitical fantasies.
The Arctic region, including Greenland, does present strategic opportunities and challenges for the United States. But these require thoughtful, nuanced approaches based on cooperation, mutual respect, and a recognition of the realities of climate change. They do not call for ham-fisted attempts at territorial acquisition that belong in the 19th century, not the 21st.
It’s time for Rep. Carter and his allies to abandon this foolish proposal and focus on the real issues facing our nation and the world. The people of both the United States and Greenland deserve better than this political theater. Let’s hope that cooler heads prevail and that this bill is quickly consigned to the dustbin of legislative history where it belongs.
