Club 提要： 1月7日，特朗普公开表示不排除通过武力手段获取对格陵兰岛的控制。这一强硬表态令人联想到他早在2019年就提出购买格陵兰岛的计划。该提议当时在坊间引发广泛关注，并揭示了北极地区日益加剧的地缘政治竞争。作为北极地区的重要门户，格陵兰岛因其丰富的矿产资源和关键航道，正日益成为争夺焦点。
1月13日，中美研究中心ICAS主任、北京对话特约专家洪农在《南华早报》撰文指出，特朗普关于格陵兰岛的谋划凸显了北极地区的地缘政治角力，并对北极治理、国际法以及大国竞争产生了深远影响。北京对话特将本文编译推介。
![]()
1月13日，洪农在南华早报发文（图源：南华早报）
2019 年 8 月，时任美国总统特朗普提出要从丹麦购买格陵兰岛，这一惊人提议成为头条新闻。尽管这一想法遭到了质疑，还引发了一些调侃，但它也重新点燃了一场历史性辩论，同时凸显出格陵兰岛日益重要的地缘政治意义。
随着特朗普准备再次入主白宫，他对格陵兰岛重燃的兴趣，及其对美国外交政策和北极治理的影响，值得深入研究。
这一想法并非新鲜事。1868 年，刚刚完成阿拉斯加收购的美国国务卿苏厄德（William H. Seward），将格陵兰岛和冰岛纳入美国扩张战略，并表达了收购兴趣。1946 年，冷战初现，格陵兰岛战略地位凸显，杜鲁门政府向丹麦提出用价值 1 亿美元的黄金购买格陵兰岛。丹麦拒绝了这一提议，但允许美国在格陵兰岛建立军事基地，其中包括皮图菲克（旧称图勒）基地，该基地至今仍是美国北极战略的关键组成部分。
格陵兰岛的战略吸引力源自其丰富的自然资源，包括稀土矿物、石油和天然气储备，以及其位于北美与欧洲之间的关键地理位置。随着气候变化加速北极冰层融化，新航道和资源开采机遇涌现，格陵兰岛的地缘政治价值急剧攀升。特朗普对格陵兰岛的兴趣，反映出美国一直以来认识到该岛在全球事务中的重要性。
![]()
格陵兰岛首都努克（图源：南华早报）
然而，根据国际法，美国购买格陵兰岛的想法将会面临一些复杂问题。格陵兰岛是丹麦王国的一个自治领地。虽然丹麦掌控外交和国防事务，但格陵兰岛政府管理其内部事务，并有权通过公投寻求完全独立。
美国购买格陵兰岛需要得到丹麦政府和格陵兰岛地方政府的同意。这一交易很可能要依据国际条约以及维护自决原则的《联合国宪章》展开谈判。格陵兰岛约 5.6 万人口 —— 其中大部分是本土因纽特人 —— 也需要被征求意见，以确保他们的权益得到保护。
尽管现代史上并无先例，但类似 1917 年丹麦出售西印度群岛（现为美属维尔京群岛）这样的案例，能让我们洞悉其中可能面临的法律与外交挑战。
特朗普的提议在北极地区相关各方中引发了不同反应。丹麦政府迅速反驳了这一想法，2019 年，丹麦首相弗雷泽里克森称其 “荒谬”。格陵兰岛的领导人也表达了同样的看法，强调其自治权，并拒绝任何出售的提议。包括加拿大、挪威和俄罗斯在内的其他北极国家，对特朗普的提议很可能是既觉得可笑又感到担忧。
![]()
1月7日，一架载有小唐纳德·特朗普的飞机抵达格陵兰岛（图源：BBC）
对加拿大而言，格陵兰岛与它的北极领土距离相近，这凸显了共同的安全与环境问题，促使加拿大做出谨慎回应。虽然加拿大不太可能支持美国的提议，但对此很可能是既谨慎又担忧。加拿大将密切关注任何此类动态，并强调多边合作、环境管理以及保护原住民权利的重要性。
俄罗斯作为北极地区的主要强国，可能会将美国对格陵兰岛的兴趣，视为其遏制俄罗斯在该地区野心这一更广泛战略的一部分。与此同时，挪威和其他北欧国家优先考虑通过北极理事会进行合作，很可能对任何单边行动持怀疑态度。
中国作为北极开发的重要利益相关方，其受到的影响不容忽视。北京已在格陵兰岛的基础设施和采矿业进行了大量投资，并将这些活动视为其 “冰上丝绸之路” 倡议的一部分。美国任何试图收购格陵兰岛的举动，都可能影响中国的北极战略，加剧大国博弈。
丹麦对特朗普提议的回应，反映出其更广泛的战略重点。作为北约成员国以及美国的亲密盟友，丹麦重视与华盛顿的伙伴关系，但不太可能考虑一项有损自身国家利益或格陵兰岛自治权的出售交易。
美国对格陵兰岛关注度的提升，也可能影响丹麦在北约中的角色以及它与其他北极国家的关系。丹麦可能面临压力，需要在与美国的联盟关系，以及通过多边框架致力于北极合作之间寻求平衡。
对格陵兰岛而言，通过资源开发和国际合作实现经济独立仍然是关键要务。虽然一些格陵兰岛的政治人士主张与美国建立更紧密联系，并将其视为经济增长和基础设施发展的契机，但也有人对外部干涉持谨慎态度，将其视为对自身自治权以及独立愿景的冒犯。
美国试图收购格陵兰岛，即便未能成功，也可能重新引发有关如何在其自治愿望与外国投资及战略伙伴关系需求之间实现最佳平衡的讨论。
一个影响丹麦和格陵兰岛决策的关键因素，是基于可持续发展和原住民权利的北极治理需求日益增长。任何有关格陵兰岛未来的讨论，都必须考虑当地民众的诉求，他们正努力应对气候变化、经济发展和文化保护等诸多挑战。
![]()
早在2019年，特朗普就炒作“购买格陵兰岛”，声称保证不在格陵兰岛上建设“特朗普大厦”（图源：观察者网）
特朗普购买格陵兰岛的想法虽不太可能实现，但这恰恰凸显了北极地区在全球地缘政治中日益重要的地位。北极治理框架，尤其是北极理事会，传统上侧重于环境保护、科学研究和原住民权利。然而，该地区不断加剧的地缘政治竞争，正给这一框架带来压力，迫使其关注安全问题。
美国若再次试图通过外交、经济或领土方面的举措，加强其在格陵兰岛的影响力，可能会使北极理事会的运作变得复杂，并将其议程转向安全和地缘政治竞争。
出售格陵兰岛或许不太现实，但它对北极治理、国际法以及大国竞争产生的广泛影响不容忽视。应对这些挑战需要谨慎的外交手段，尊重主权，并致力于实现可持续发展，以造福包括原住民在内的所有北极利益相关者。
北极地区的未来以及格陵兰岛在其中的角色，不仅取决于大国的雄心壮志，也取决于格陵兰人民的韧性和愿望。
原文如下：
In August 2019, then US president Donald Trump made headlines with his surprising proposal to buy Greenland from Denmark. While the idea was met with scepticism and humour, it also reignited a historical debate and shed light on Greenland’s growing geopolitical significance.As Trump prepares to re-enter the White House, his renewed interest in Greenland – and its implications for US foreign policy and Arctic governance – merits deeper examination.The idea is not new. In 1868, US secretary of state William H. Seward, fresh from acquiring Alaska, expressed interest in Greenland and Iceland as part of America’s expansion strategy. In 1946, the Truman administration offered Denmark US$100 million in gold for Greenland, recognising its strategic importance with a Cold War emerging. While Denmark declined, the US was allowed to establish military bases on Greenland, including at Pituffik (formerly Thule), which remains a critical part of its Arctic strategy.Greenland’s appeal lies in its immense natural resources, including rare earth minerals, and oil and gas reserves, as well as its strategic location between North America and Europe. As climate change accelerates Arctic ice melt, opening up new shipping routes and resource extraction opportunities, Greenland’s geopolitical value has soared. Trump’s interest in Greenland reflects a long-standing recognition of its importance in global affairs.Under international law, the notion of buying Greenland raises complex questions. Greenland is an autonomous territory within the kingdom of Denmark. While Denmark retains control over foreign affairs and defence, Greenland’s government manages its internal affairs and has the right to pursue full independence through a referendum.Buying Greenland would require the consent of both Denmark and Greenland’s governments. The transaction is likely to involve negotiations under international treaties and the United Nations Charter, which upholds the principle of self-determination. Greenland’s population of roughly 56,000 – predominantly indigenous Inuit – would need to be consulted, ensuring their rights and interests are protected.While there is no modern precedent, analogous cases like the 1917 sale of the Danish West Indies (now the US Virgin Islands) offer insights into the legal and diplomatic challenges.Trump’s proposal has elicited mixed reactions from Arctic stakeholders. Denmark’s government swiftly dismissed the idea, with Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen calling it “absurd” back in 2019. Greenland’s leaders echoed this sentiment, emphasising its autonomy and rejecting any notion of a sale. Other Arctic states, including Canada, Norway and Russia, are likely to have viewed Trump’s proposal with a mix of amusement and apprehension.For Canada, Greenland’s proximity to its Arctic territories highlights shared security and environmental concerns, prompting a measured response. While Canada is unlikely to support the US proposal, it is likely to be viewed with a mix of caution and concern. Any such development would be closely monitored, with Canada emphasising the importance of multilateral cooperation, environmental stewardship and the protection of indigenous rights.Russia, a dominant Arctic power, may interpret US interest in Greenland as part of a broader strategy to counter its ambitions in the region. Meanwhile, Norway and other Nordic states prioritise cooperation through the Arctic Council and are likely to view any unilateral action with scepticism.The implications for China, a key stakeholder in Arctic development, cannot be ignored. Beijing has made substantial investments in Greenland’s infrastructure and mining industries, presenting these activities as part of its Polar Silk Road initiative. Any US attempt to acquire Greenland could disrupt China’s Arctic strategy, escalating the US-China strategic rivalry.Denmark’s response to Trump’s proposal reflects its broader strategic priorities. As a Nato member and close US ally, Denmark values its partnership with Washington but is unlikely to entertain a sale that undermines its national interests or Greenland’s autonomy.A heightened US focus on Greenland could also influence Denmark’s role in Nato and its relationships with other Arctic states. Denmark may face pressure to balance its alliance with the US against its commitment to Arctic cooperation through multilateral frameworks.For Greenland, economic independence through resource development and international partnerships remains a key priority. While some Greenland politicians advocate for closer ties with the US and see it as an opportunity for economic growth and infrastructure development, others remain wary of interference, viewing it as an affront to their autonomy and aspirations for independence.A US bid to acquire Greenland, even if unsuccessful, could reopen debates about how best to balance its aspirations for autonomy with the need for foreign investment and strategic partnerships.A key factor shaping Denmark and Greenland’s decision-making is the growing demand for Arctic governance rooted in sustainability and indigenous rights. Any discussion of Greenland’s future must consider the aspirations of its people, who are navigating the challenges of climate change, economic development and cultural preservation.Trump’s idea of buying Greenland, while unlikely to materialise, highlights the Arctic’s growing importance in global geopolitics. Arctic governance frameworks, particularly the Arctic Council, have traditionally focused on environmental protection, scientific research and indigenous rights. But the region’s increasing geopolitical competition is putting pressure on these frameworks to address security concerns.A renewed push by the US to strengthen its foothold in Greenland, whether through diplomatic, economic or territorial overtures, could complicate the council’s dynamics and shift its agenda towards security and geopolitical competition.A Greenland sale may be implausible but the broader implications for Arctic governance, international law and great power competition cannot be overlooked. Navigating these challenges requires careful diplomacy, respect for sovereignty and a commitment to sustainable development that benefits all Arctic stakeholders, including its indigenous populations.The future of the Arctic – and Greenland’s role – will be shaped not only by the ambitions of major powers but also by the resilience and aspirations of its people.特朗普将掀“关税战”，多国“合纵连横”图谱隐现
北京对话与中美研究中心签署战略合作备忘录， 深化中美学术交流与合作
姜锋：特朗普“新政”将很颠簸，中欧都要系好安全带（中英对照）
中国经济已做好应对“特朗普冲击”准备
