Advocates for democracy and self-determination say Greenland would do well to study the experiences of America's existing territories, such as those in the Pacific Photo: Kennedy Warne
As United States political leaders once again raise the prospect of territorial expansion, advocates for democracy and self-determination say Greenland would do well to study the experiences of America's existing territories, such as those in the Pacific, and the political tradeoffs that came with US rule.
Speaking during a cross-territorial forum hosted by Right to Democracy earlier this month, the organisation's co-director Neil Weare said recent rhetoric about Greenland echoes the language used during the United States' imperial expansion at the turn of the 20th century.
"When President Trump first took office … he declared that, quote, 'the United States will once again consider itself a growing nation - one that expands our territory and carries our flag into new and beautiful horizons,'" Weare said, noting that the remarks invoked President William McKinley, under whose administration the United States took control of Puerto Rico, Guam, and the Philippines.
The US government's recent rhetoric about Greenland echoes the language used during the United States' imperial expansion, Weare said. Photo: AFP / Emil Stach
Weare said the renewed attention on Greenland should not be dismissed as symbolic.
"This wasn't just some idle speculation-this wasn't a joke-this was serious," he said.
By contrast, Weare described Greenland's existing political arrangement with Denmark as one that preserves democratic participation and a clear pathway to self-determination.
He said Greenland elects its own local government, is represented in Denmark's parliament, and retains the legal right to decide its own future.
"They also have an express right to self-determination, including the ability to have a referendum on independence at any time that they should choose to," Weare said.
"So it's a very different relationship than the one that the US territories have with the United States."
From the US Virgin Islands, Hadiya Sewer, an environment and democracy fellow with Right to Democracy, said Greenland should view strategic arguments for annexation through a historical lens.
Sewer said the US acquisition of the Virgin Islands was rooted in broader imperial ambitions tied to national security and regional dominance-arguments, she noted, that continue to be raised today.
She said Virgin Islanders remain subject to congressional control more than a century later, without the full political rights enjoyed by residents of US states.
"We do not have a constitution, like many US territories. We exist under the plenary power of Congress."
'Imperialism is real for us' - CNMI advocate
Former Guam delegate Robert Underwood cautioned that claims of protection and strategic importance do not guarantee political equality or long-term security.
Underwood said territories are often elevated or sidelined depending on shifting geopolitical priorities.
"They're telling us that we will be defended because we're part of 'the US homeland'," Underwood said.
"And I'm thinking, well, really? We've heard that story before."
Underwood added that congressional authority over territories is frequently portrayed as benevolent but rarely delivers meaningful self-governance.
"There's always the theory that plenary power can be used for good," he said, adding "I've yet to see it happen."
From the Northern Marianas, environmental advocate and former legislator Sheila Babauta said US territorial status often means fighting constant federal intervention in local affairs.
Babauta cited examples ranging from labour policy to environmental regulation as evidence of decisions imposed without meaningful local consent.
"The experience of imperialism is real for us," Babauta said. "Get ready to fight, and fight, and fight."
American Samoan attorney Charles Ala'ilima urged Greenlanders to focus on the legal structure underlying US territorial governance.
Ala'ilima said congressional plenary power-the authority of Congress to legislate unilaterally for territories - defines the territorial relationship and limits local self-rule.
"My first question would be, do you really want to be subject to the plenary authority of Congress?" Ala'ilima said.
From Puerto Rico, activist Eva Prados described how federal oversight can leave territorial residents politically powerless.
Prados said decisions affecting daily life are often made far from the communities they impact.
"Most of the time we feel powerless when the federal government impose all these things," Prados said. "It's terrible to feel powerless."
As the forum concluded, Weare invited panelists to offer brief parting messages to the people of Greenland.
The speakers urged Greenlanders to protect democratic rights, retain control over political decision-making, and resist arrangements that prioritise strategic interests over self-determination.
Summing up the warning shared across US territories, Weare said their experiences offer a cautionary tale - one Greenland still has the power to avoid.
"We've seen that movie before," he said.
