President Donald Trump has long mused about the U.S. taking over Greenland, a suggestion that European leaders and Greenlanders have both bristled and scoffed at. But after the U.S. raided Venezuela over the weekend, Trump’s arctic bluster appears more serious than ever.

A day after the attack on Venezuela, which killed dozens of people and deposed its leader Nicolás Maduro, Katie Miller, the wife of White House deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller, posted on X a map of Greenland with the American flag superimposed on it. “SOON,” she wrote in the caption. Stephen Miller told CNN on Monday that “the formal position of the U.S. [is] that Greenland should be part of the U.S.”

Read More: Trump’s Potential Next Targets After Venezuela

Greenland, an autonomous island territory of the Kingdom of Denmark with a population of 57,000 people, already houses a U.S. military base. But the Trump Administration has coveted even more authority over the territory for its strategic location in the Arctic region to protect U.S. and NATO security interests. “We do need Greenland, absolutely. We need it for defense,” Trump told the Atlantic on Sunday, noting that the island is “surrounded by Russian and Chinese ships.” Greenland also happens to be rich in natural resources including natural gas, oil, and minerals that are used in technology and military applications, which have been at the center of a trade war between the U.S. and China.

The Trump Administration, however, has been met with decisive opposition from the leaders of other NATO countries, including Denmark, which still controls Greenland’s defence and foreign policy. The leaders of Denmark, France, Germany, Italy, Poland, and the U.K. said in a Jan. 6 joint statement that “It is for Denmark and Greenland, and them only, to decide on matters concerning Denmark and Greenland.”

“NATO has made clear that the Arctic region is a priority and ‍European Allies are stepping up,” the statement said. “We and many other Allies have increased our presence, activities and investments to keep the Arctic safe and to deter adversaries.” Over the past year, Trump has leveraged trade with the U.S. to push allies to invest more in security and defence.

Among Greenlanders, there is a desire for independence from Denmark, but the Trump Administration has also sought in recent months to foment support for the U.S. within the territory’s pro-independence movement.

“Enough is enough,” Greenland’s Prime Minister Jens-Frederik Nielsen said on Monday. “No more pressure. No more innuendo. No more fantasies about annexation.”

Still, a U.S. official told Reuters that Trump’s desire for Greenland is “not going away” because of such objections. Instead, the Trump Administration is considering a range of options to secure control of the island in the wake of its military operation in Venezuela.

“Diplomacy is always the president’s first option ‌with anything, and deal making. He loves deals. So if a good deal can be struck to acquire Greenland, that would definitely be his first instinct,” the official said, specifying the possibility of a Compact of Free Association agreement or a U.S. purchase of the territory.

But Trump himself has also not shied away from the possibility of military action, even as some political allies appear more reluctant for now. In March, the President said the U.S. would “go as far as we have to go” in order to take control of Greenland.

Here’s what to know about the ways the Trump Administration could take control of Greenland.

Tapping on pro-independence movement

During Trump’s second term, his Administration has sought to exploit the pro-independence movement in Greenland to stoke pro-American sentiments.

Vice President J.D. Vance visited Greenland in March and called for the territory’s independence from Denmark. “The people of Greenland are going to have self-determination,” Vance said, suggesting that the U.S. planned to deal with Greenland independently. “We hope that they choose to partner with the United States, because we’re the only nation on Earth that will respect their sovereignty and respect their security.” Greenland currently needs Denmark’s approval to sign deals.

Last month, Trump appointed Louisiana Gov. Jeff Landry, a Republican, as special envoy to Greenland—a role created by Trump that signals the U.S.’s intention to treat Greenland as separate from Denmark. Landry “understands how essential Greenland is to our National Security,” Trump posted on Truth Social in December.

When asked by CNBC whether Arctic security should be decided in conjunction with NATO, Landry argued on the basis of self-determination and anti-imperialism to support greater U.S. influence over Greenland.

“I think we should ask the Greenlanders,” Landry said, pointing to the Monroe Doctrine, a foreign policy declared in 1823 that asserted that the Americas should not be subject to future colonization by European powers while the U.S. would not interfere in European affairs. The U.S. has since cited the doctrine to justify American intervention in Latin American countries, including the recent Venezuela intervention.

The U.S. government has also been accused of spying on and seeking to covertly influence Greenland’s pro-independence movement. Denmark summoned U.S. diplomats last year over reported covert influence operations in Greenland.

In public opinion polls, a majority of Greenlanders said they would vote in favor of independence from Denmark if given a plebiscite. Greenland would also require the approval of a deal between its government and Denmark’s in order to gain independence. But 85% of Greenlanders polled last year also said they were against Greenland leaving Denmark only to become part of the U.S.

Cutting a deal

Another option reportedly on the table is purchasing the territory. Secretary of State Marco Rubio told lawmakers at a closed briefing that the Administration wants to buy Greenland from Denmark, according to the Wall Street Journal. The White House’s threats against Greenland are as such part of a negotiating tactic, not a sign of imminent invasion, Rubio said. Greenland and Denmark have said that they want to meet with Rubio to clarify the U.S.’s claims over Greenland.

American officials have reportedly also floated the idea of a Compact of Free Association—an agreement that would allow U.S. armed forces to operate without restriction in the territory in exchange for the U.S. providing protection, certain services, and duty-free trade. The U.S. currently has COFA agreements with Micronesia, the Marshall Islands, and Palau. But such an agreement would likely require Greenland to first be independent of Denmark.

“I think that the President supports an independent Greenland with economic ties and trade opportunities for the United States,” Landry told CNBC, adding that the U.S. could offer a better economic deal to Greenland than Denmark or Europe do.

Military action ‘always an option’

If all else fails, however, the White House told media outlets on Tuesday that “utilizing the U.S. military is always an option at the Commander-in-Chief’s disposal.”

It’s not the first time the Trump Administration has raised military force as a possibility. Last June, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth testified at a congressional hearing that the Pentagon has “plans for any contingency” when it comes to taking Greenland (or Panama) by force if necessary.

Invading Greenland would be an extreme measure—doing so would go against American and international law. Already, Sen. Ruben Gallego (D, Ariz.) said he will introduce a resolution to block Trump from invading Greenland. Committing U.S. troops to armed conflict, including a military occupation, for longer than 60 days would require congressional approval. And even Republican Speaker of the House Mike Johnson, a frequent Trump defender, told reporters Tuesday that he didn’t believe seizing Greenland by force would be “appropriate.” 

But the Trump Administration has already ignored lawmakers’ protests of its ongoing military aggression against Venezuela and carried out lethal strikes on boats in the Caribbean and the Pacific with questionable legal basis.

Certainly, an invasion of Greenland would risk the NATO alliance and the U.S.’s relationship with its allies. But should Trump decide getting Greenland is worth the risk, there may not be much in his way. NATO cannot respond militarily without unanimous approval, which includes that of the U.S., and while theoretically European countries could try to defend Greenland, the U.S. military is vastly larger and better equipped, and already has troops stationed in Greenland.“The United States military is capable of landing any number of forces on Greenland, either by air or by sea, and then claiming that it’s American territory,” Thomas Crosbie, an associate professor of military operations at the Royal Danish Defense College, told Politico. Lin Mortensgaard, a researcher at the Danish Institute for International Studies, added that such an operation would be over “in half an hour or less.”