Panama, Greenland, and the United States
If there’s one thing history teaches us, it’s that the United States has always had its eyes on strategically important real estate. Whether it’s digging a canal through Panama or floating the idea of purchasing Greenland, the reasoning is often the same: geography is power.
When former President Donald Trump first suggested in 2019 that the U.S. should buy Greenland, the internet lit up with memes and jokes about ice, polar bears, and unsolicited property deals. But believe it or not, the idea wasn’t as random as it seemed. In fact, it’s part of a long history of the U.S. pursuing land and influence in key global hotspots.
The President-elect has floated these potential territorial expansions even more aggressively after being elected to a second term. This creates urgency for understanding the consequences, good and bad, if Trump is being serious.
The Panama Canal Zone: America’s Shortcut to the World
Imagine you’re living in the 1800s, and ships carrying goods from New York to California must take a grueling, months-long journey around the tip of South America. It’s not just inconvenient — it’s expensive and dangerous. So, by the late 19th century, the U.S. was seriously studying building a canal in Central America to connect the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans.
Why Panama?
Originally, the French tried to build a canal in Panama in the 1880s. But the project was a disaster: money ran out, diseases like yellow fever and malaria killed thousands of workers, and the dream of a canal seemed out of reach. Enter the United States.
In 1903, Panama wasn’t even its own country yet — it was part of Colombia. When Colombia hesitated to give the U.S. the rights to build and control a canal, President Theodore Roosevelt threw his weight behind a Panamanian independence movement.
When Panama declared itself independent (with a little nudge from the U.S. military), the newly formed country quickly signed a treaty giving the U.S. control of a 10-mile-wide strip of land to build the canal. This area became the Panama Canal Zone, a strip of American-controlled land in the middle of Panama.
Building the Canal
Construction wasn’t easy — it took nearly a decade, cost the U.S. about $375 million (a huge sum at the time), and claimed the lives of thousands of workers. But when the Panama Canal opened in 1914, it was a game-changer. The canal cut the journey between the east and west coasts of the U.S. by thousands of miles, transforming global trade and solidifying America’s role as a world power.
A Century of Control
For decades, the U.S. treated the Panama Canal Zone like a colony. It was governed under U.S. laws, complete with American schools and neighborhoods for its workers. But to Panamanians, the zone was a glaring symbol of foreign control. Protests erupted in the 1960s, and by the 1970s, it was clear that change was needed.
In 1977, President Jimmy Carter signed treaties with Panama’s leader, Omar Torrijos, agreeing to gradually transfer control of the canal to Panama. The handover was completed in 1999. Today, Panama runs the canal, but it remains a critical trade route — and a reminder of how far the U.S. will go to secure strategic infrastructure.
Greenland: The (Almost) 51st State?
Greenland might not seem like a place anyone would fight over — an inhospitable, rocky island covered by a glacier — but its location and natural resources make it a hot commodity.
A Chilly Beginning
Greenland has been under Danish control for centuries, but the U.S. first showed interest in it during the 1860s. Back then, Secretary of State William Seward, who also bought Alaska from Russia, thought Greenland would make a great addition to the U.S. But Denmark wasn’t interested in selling, so the idea was shelved.
During World War II, Greenland suddenly became strategically important. With Nazi Germany occupying Denmark, Greenland found itself cut off from its parent country. The U.S. stepped in, establishing military bases on the island. After the war, during the early days of the Cold War, the U.S. took things a step further: in 1946, President Harry Truman offered Denmark $100 million for Greenland. Denmark, again, said no.
Why Does Greenland Matter?
You might be wondering: why would the U.S. want an icy island with the population of a small city? For one, Greenland’s location is strategically vital. It sits between North America and Europe, making it a perfect spot for military bases. In fact, the U.S.’s Thule Air Base in Greenland is still a key part of its missile defense system today.
Greenland is also sitting on a treasure trove of natural resources, including rare-earth minerals, oil, and gas. And, as the extent of Arctic ice in the summer recedes, new shipping routes are opening, making the region even more valuable. Greenland partly defines one of two pathways into and out of the Arctic Ocean.
Trump’s Greenland Proposal
Fast forward to 2019, when Trump casually floated the idea of buying Greenland. At first, it sounded like something out of a history book — hadn’t we tried this before? But Trump’s reasoning wasn’t far off. Owning Greenland would give the U.S. a major foothold in the Arctic, with its untapped resources and growing geopolitical importance.
Of course, Denmark wasn’t thrilled. Danish leaders quickly shot down the idea, and Trump’s suggestion became a punchline. But behind the headlines, the proposal highlighted a serious point: the Arctic is becoming a new frontier for global competition, and Greenland is at the center of it.
The Strategic Picture
While Trump’s Greenland idea might have seemed odd, it fits into a larger historical pattern. The U.S. has always looked for ways to control or influence regions that are critical to its economy and security. The Panama Canal Zone gave America dominance over a key trade route in the 20th century.
Still, the underlying logic remains the same: geography matters. Whether it’s controlling a man-made shortcut through the Americas or positioning itself in the Arctic, the U.S. has always played the strategic long game. But the way the world operates has changed. In the early 1900s, the U.S. could essentially muscle its way into controlling the Panama Canal Zone. Today, trying to “buy” Greenland would require navigating complex alliances and diplomacy.
If Denmark were to voluntarily offer up Greenland for sale, that would be one thing. However, strongarming a treaty ally to extract their territory would undermine the strategic logic of NATO and violate norms of taking territory by conquest established since the Second World War.