Who will defend the Arctic from change leaders?
Every weekday morning I wake up wondering how a man turning 79 this weekend still has the energy to want to change almost everything he sees or hears about. Many of us would be exhausted trying to be a change leader both around the clock and around the world. Yet Donald Trump keeps going, issuing new statements. Or rather, what used to be presidential statements in the old world are now tweets or off-the-record comments to his trusted journalists.
Mr. Trump seems to be full of vigor as he shares his views on ending the war in Ukraine, imposing huge tariffs on the European Union, promoting the genocide of Palestinians, or attempting to annex independent territories and states into the United States. During his previous term, Trump made headlines expressing interest in buying Greenland to make it the 52nd state of the U.S. If re-elected, he resumed his Arctic conquest from where he left off four years ago.
Greenlanders have repeatedly and firmly said that Greenland is not for sale. When I lived in Greenland between Trump’s terms, I remember a preschool-aged Greenlandic child saying to me in perfect English: “We are not for sale.” That phrase has almost become Greenland’s slogan. It’s echoed by Greenlandic politicians regardless of coalition alignment, as well as by the Danish state leadership, which still holds legal authority over Greenland’s foreign and security policy.
Mr. Change Leader’s Arctic Interests
The Arctic is warming four times faster than the global average. Scientists estimate the region may be ice-free in summer by 2050. An ice-free Arctic would open new maritime routes, though it wouldn’t eliminate the region’s extreme conditions. The U.S. Arctic strategy, drafted during Trump’s first term, acknowledges a race for Arctic natural resources—from dual-use minerals to oil and gas. Last week’s major Arctic news was Trump’s intention to expand Alaskan oil drilling into protected natural areas.
Since World War II, the U.S. has maintained a strong presence in Greenland. Last year, the U.S. upgraded its military air base in Thule, northwest Greenland, into a space base called Pituffik. According to Danish security policy researcher Marc Jacobsen, Trump’s main interest in Greenland is to counter China’s Arctic ambitions, as China has increased its influence there. U.S. and Danish legislation already allows for a stronger U.S. presence in Greenland, even though Greenland is not American territory.
From Arctic Finland to Northern Finland
The competition for Arctic raw materials and military-political organization is intensifying. Countries farther south are striving for observer status in the Arctic Council to at least secure consolation prizes if the biggest gains go to the superpowers. Finland is one of the eight Arctic states. In addition to international cooperation and research funding, Finland’s Arctic identity has also been represented in national politics.
Until last year, every Finnish ministry had an official responsible for monitoring and communicating the legislative impacts on the Arctic region. That’s no longer the case. The government’s streamlining decision aligns with its program priorities—replacing the National Arctic Advisory Board with a new Northern Finland program. This program is primarily economic and includes all of Finland from Kokkola northwards. Now, when people talk about the North or even the Arctic, they refer to a larger area than the hometown of the Oulu Kärpät hockey team.
Does Finland Defend a Socially and Environmentally Sustainable Future?
Finland’s foreign policy has been built on strong alliances. The Arctic dimension provides an opportunity to deepen not just Nordic cooperation but also bilateral relations with North American states. Often in Finland, people forget that within the categorization of Arctic states, Finland and Sweden fall into the second tier—being the only Arctic countries without a coastline on the Arctic Ocean. Finland’s Arctic identity and international voice on Arctic issues are not a given.
Who speaks on international platforms about human rights, climate and environmental protection, or a rules-based world order if countries like Finland fall into the margins of the global community?
Associate Professor and cultural historian Hanna Kuusela writes in her book “The Accusation – A Certain Academic Comi-Tragedy” (2024) that change leaders rarely stick around to witness the implementation of the changes they initiate—let alone their consequences. In Trump’s case, I believe Kuusela is spot-on: he will not live to see the final consequences of his endless decisions.
Eeva Honkonen
The author is a consultant at Blic and a member of the Board of the Finnish Arctic Society.