What Happens When The World Starts Paying Closer Attention?

Iceland’s strategic location in the Arctic could make for an eventful future amid shifting geopolitical alliances

​Donald Trump stood before Congress this week and made it official — again. The United States wants to buy Greenland.

The first time he floated the idea in 2019, it was easy to dismiss. It sounded like something out of the 19th century, a throwback to territorial expansion. But this time, it is not just a passing remark. His administration made it official on day one with an executive order, and now, standing before both houses of Congress, he has made it clear that acquiring Greenland is very much a priority.

The reasoning has been dressed up in national security rhetoric, framed as a way to counter Russian and Chinese influence in the Arctic. It is also about resources. Greenland holds vast deposits of rare earth minerals at a time when the U.S. is seeking to break China’s dominance over global supply chains. The message is clear. The U.S. is making aggressive moves in the region and smaller nations may not have much say in the matter.

Greenland, of course, is not Iceland. It’s a self-governing territory and ultimately under Denmark’s control. Still, for small nations watching from the sidelines, the question is unavoidable. If the U.S. sees Greenland as something it can simply claim interest in, what does that mean for other small countries in the Arctic — ones that are fully independent but just as strategically placed?

Iceland has long walked a fine line. It is part of NATO, but without a military of its own, relying on U.S. defense guarantees while staying out of the worst of global conflicts. It has maintained strong ties to Europe while keeping Brussels at arm’s length. It has welcomed trade with China while staying firmly within the Western alliance. This balancing act has worked for decades, allowing Iceland to operate as a bridge, not only between North America and Europe but between the inhabited world and the Arctic. But bridges can be crossed, controlled, or ignored, and as Arctic competition intensifies, Iceland is finding that its position is becoming more complicated.

The Arctic is no longer a quiet frontier. Climate change is redrawing the region, opening up new shipping routes and making previously inaccessible resources available. Russia has responded aggressively, reopening Soviet-era bases, building nuclear-powered icebreakers and deploying submarines into the North Atlantic. China, despite having no Arctic territory, has declared itself a “near-Arctic state” and has been quietly buying its way into the region, investing in infrastructure and shipping routes. It has already attempted to buy large swaths of land in Iceland, under the pretext of tourism and research, only to be blocked by the Icelandic government. Every major power is looking for leverage in the Arctic — and Iceland is caught in the middle.

The United States has taken notice. Keflavík Air Base, once considered a relic of the Cold War, is no longer dormant. It’s not a full-time U.S. military base, but it has become a key hub for NATO operations. The U.S. has invested in upgrading its facilities and American military aircraft, including P-8 Poseidon surveillance planes, regularly rotate through, monitoring Russian activity in the North Atlantic.

Iceland’s strategic importance is growing. That should be an asset, but in this new era of great-power competition, it could just as easily become a liability.

Iceland, however, is not Greenland. It is not an isolated territory with little global influence. It has long been a proving ground for new ideas in politics, business, and society. It pioneered renewable energy, running almost entirely on geothermal and hydroelectric power, and exported that expertise to shape energy systems from East Africa to the American West. It set the global standard for gender equality, built one of the world’s most resilient democracies, and fostered a high-trust, low-crime society that makes it one of the best places in the world to live, work, and raise a family.

For a nation of its size, Iceland punches far above its weight. It proves that small states, when governed effectively, can be flexible, innovative, and globally relevant. It has shown that small nations are not just shaped by global trends they can shape them.

But here’s the real question: What happens when the world starts paying closer attention? Iceland can’t stop the U.S. from wanting Greenland or China from circling the Arctic. But it can decide how to respond. Will Iceland set the terms for its future — or wait for someone else to do it?

Adam Roy Gordon is a Reykjavík-based sustainability strategist with international experience at the United Nations, leading global corporate sustainability initiatives, and academia, including as a lecturer at Columbia University’s Climate School.