In Paris — about security, but not without mentions of resources
U.S. Secretary of Energy Chris Wright, speaking at a conference of the French Institute of International Relations in Paris, said he believes the Donald Trump administration's interest in Greenland is primarily a matter of national security, rather than solely a desire to ramp up extraction of rare-earth metals. Bloomberg reported on the remarks.
"We have all sorts of places to mine rare-earth metals, as well as to extract oil and gas. [...] Maybe that would improve the lives of Greenlanders; our interest is national security"
— Chris Wright, U.S. Secretary of Energy
Background: Trump's interests and actions
At the start of his second presidential term, Donald Trump promoted the idea of concluding agreements for the supply of rare-earth minerals from Greenland and Ukraine to reduce dependence on Chinese exports. However, recently the administration has shifted its emphasis from direct extraction to issues of processing and control of technological supply chains.
According to Axios, in January Trump raised the issue of Greenland in contacts with partners, while documents emphasized respect for Denmark's sovereignty.
Why it matters — security, supply chains, partnership
U.S. interest in Greenland's resources combines two logics: a geostrategic one — containing the influence of Russia and China in the Arctic — and an economic one — diversifying critical supply chains. The shift from extraction to processing indicates a desire to control not only raw materials but also the added value of technological components.
For Ukraine this is an important reminder: the presence of deposits is only part of the task. Institutions, investment, and a technological base are needed to turn natural resources into a sustainable economic advantage and to minimize geopolitical risks.
Summary
Wright's statement tones down some of the blunt rhetoric about resource exploitation, but it does not eliminate economic interest in Greenland. If earlier declarations about cooperation with Greenland and Ukraine were a signal, the next step is whether they will turn into long-term contracts and investments in processing capacities. The reliability of supply chains for our technological and defense sectors will depend on that.
Will partners be able to turn the U.S.'s strategic interest into practical benefits for Ukraine and create independent, transparent supply chains?
