Finally, Trump and his Congress must ensure a Greenlandic exemption to the Jones Act. The act requires goods shipped between American ports to be transported on American-built and American-crewed vessels. Very few ships meet these criteria, and if Greenland entered the United States and became subject to the act, the cost of its imports and exports to the United States would skyrocket. Solving this problem is an essential precondition for an American Greenland.

Stumbling Blocks

It is difficult to imagine the precise mechanism through which Greenland would pass from Danish to American control at present. A trilateral treaty between Denmark, Greenland, and the United States is one possibility, but it would require substantial buy-in from both Nuuk and Copenhagen. Another possibility would be for the Greenlandic people to vote for an association with the United States in a referendum, which Denmark would be obliged to support. As noted before, this would only be possible with substantial buy-in from the Greenlandic people.

Unfortunately, Trump’s threats toward Denmark—and blustering social media posts asserting rightful ownership over the island—have won him few friends in either place. All five of Greenland’s major political parties have come out against American annexation, as has Greenlandic prime minister Mute Egede. For America to make any progress towards this goal, it must develop a pro-American Greenlandic constituency—native Greenlanders who sincerely view integration into the United States as the best way to guarantee a secure, prosperous future and who can effectively advocate for these views to their countrymen.

Trump’s bombastic and combative brand of populism has succeeded in mobilizing a core population in America already angry at their government. Still, there is little evidence that this approach has significant appeal in Greenland. A few of the island’s residents do support Trump’s idea, and one recently hosted Donald Trump, Jr. and conservative commentator Charlie Kirk on a visit. But it is clear that, at present, such people are the exception, and the vast majority of the Greenlandic population opposes this idea.

What can change their perceptions? A good place to start would be through expansion of American investments in Greenland, greater American aid to Greenland—incidentally driving a wedge between Greenland and Denmark, as Copenhagen views such aid with suspicion and hostility—and an increased American cultural presence in Greenland, for instance through greater tourism. Through such measures, Trump could communicate that association with the United States is in the island’s best interest. Social media diatribes will communicate the opposite. It remains to be seen which path he will find more worthy of pursuing.

Trevor Filseth is a managing editor at The National Interest.

Image: Jan Tolar / Shutterstock.com.