The Arctic has long been viewed as a future arena of geopolitical competition and conflict. Renewed remarks by U.S. President Donald J. Trump about taking control of Greenland – a semi-autonomous, Indigenous governed territory within the Danish Realm – have brought that future abruptly into the present. 

Given the unpredictability of the Trump Administration and its increasingly hostile tone towards Europe, a swift or stable settlement appears unlikely. To say that the stakes are high is an understatement. 

What is at risk is not only the lives and livelihoods of the Greenlandic people, but also the cohesion of the transatlantic
alliance and the credibility of a rules-based international order – long underwritten by the United States itself. In this context of profound uncertainty, it is necessary to consider how the dispute over Greenland’s future might unfold.

The Copenhagen Institute for Futures Studies has therefore developed four scenarios outlining how the conflict over Greenland could end, and the geopolitical implications of each outcome. While scenarios typically have a medium- to longterm focus – looking at least five to ten years into the future to reduce the need to constantly revise analyses and narratives due to rapidly changing developments – the gravity of the situation at hand demand that these scenarios focus on the near term. 

Accordingly, they are written from the perspective of November 2026, shortly before the U.S. mid-term elections. The scenarios do not assign probabilities, nor do they advocate a preferred outcome. Rather, they offer snapshots of plausible near futures intended to illuminate the potential consequences of decisions that could be taken within days or weeks, and to support preparation for the wider political, economic and societal fallout they entail.