Donald Trump is talking about Greenland again. He wants the US to control it.

That sounds crazy on the surface. But it actually plugs into one of the biggest strategic shifts of the next decade: the return of the Arctic as a front line and the return of “mineral wars” as a core investing theme.

If you have ever seen the 1968 film Ice Station Zebra, you know the plot. A secret payload drops from a spy satellite, and US and Soviet subs race under the ice to grab it first.

Swap the film canister for rare earths and battery metals, and you are close to today’s script.

A short history of Arctic security

The Arctic has been strategic for a long time. In World War II, the North Atlantic and the seas around Greenland were vital for Allied convoys, weather stations and U‑boat hunting grounds.

Then the Cold War turned the Arctic into a nuclear front line. The shortest route for Soviet bombers and missiles into North America ran “over the top” across the pole.

So the US and NATO built radar fences like the DEW Line, and massive air bases such as Thule in Greenland, to spot incoming attacks.

Nuclear subs from both sides slipped through the Greenland‑Iceland‑UK gap and under the ice, playing cat and mouse with each other, very similar to Ice Station Zebra.

After the Soviet Union collapsed, everyone relaxed. Military activity dropped and the Arctic Council and other forums focused on science, fishing and cooperation.

That holiday is over.

Russia has rebuilt northern bases and airfields, and China calls itself a “near‑Arctic state” with talk of a Polar Silk Road for shipping and resources.

NATO is running more exercises in the “High North” and, with Sweden and Finland joining, seven of the eight Arctic states are now in the alliance.

Trump’s Greenland talk just throws petrol on the fire.

Why Greenland matters for minerals

Greenland ticks three boxes: location, security and rocks.

It sits between North America and Europe, right where future Arctic shipping lanes will run as the ice retreats.

The US already operates the Thule air base there.

Under the ice and permafrost are big endowments of rare earths, zinc, copper, gold, graphite and more.

Some of the rare earth deposits are among the largest outside China, including valuable heavy rare earths used in EV motors, wind turbines and advanced defence kit.

Melting ice makes this easier to explore and, eventually, mine.

That is why US, European and Chinese interests are suddenly so interested in a place most people could not find on a map five years ago. But here is the key point for an Australian investor.

Big powers do not just want any supply. They want secure, friendly, low‑risk supply, as far from Beijing’s reach as possible.

Greenland is still years away from serious production.

So the real, near-term beneficiaries of this scramble are existing and emerging producers in Canada and Australia.

Every speech about diversifying away from Chinese supply chains pushes more capital, offtake deals and government support toward ASX‑listed critical mineral companies: lithium, rare earths, copper, nickel, graphite etc.

This is a structural tailwind for the whole complex, a complex that has started 2026 off with a big bang.

Gold quietly loves this chaos

There is one more angle today.

When investors see headlines about a US president talking about grabbing a chunk of the Arctic, they don’t just think about critical minerals.

They think about risk: geopolitical, financial and currency risk. That is why gold miners are pushing higher once more.

Gold is still the default “insurance policy” when the world looks less stable. So you have a neat two‑track setup.

Call it the “Greenland trade”.

On one side, higher growth, higher risk critical mineral stocks benefit from a long security squeeze.

On the other side, quality gold producers and developers benefit every time the headlines get a little crazier.

What a time to be alive, eh?