Former MI6 chief backs U.S. control of Greenland? Short answer: He reportedly floated a 100‑year lease on TV, but we couldn’t find the original clip to confirm the exact words. The broader NATO row and European pushback are real—and getting louder.
Headline: Greenland, Leases, and a Looming NATO Riff: What Sir Richard Dearlove Actually Said—and What He Didn’t
Lead The most striking twist isn’t the claim itself—it’s the sourcing. Multiple outlets say Sir Richard Dearlove told TalkTV that Denmark should lease Greenland to the U.S. for 100 years to bolster European security. But there’s a catch: we couldn’t find TalkTV’s own clip or transcript to verify those exact quotes. Meanwhile, European leaders, Greenlandic parties, and the U.K. prime minister are firmly pushing back on any U.S. “takeover” talk, warning it could fracture NATO at the worst possible moment.
What’s verified—and what isn’t Verified facts
- Maduro capture and charges: U.S. forces seized Venezuela’s Nicolás Maduro on January 3, 2026; he later appeared in federal court in New York on drug-related charges and pleaded not guilty. Sources: Washington Post; AP
- Europe backs Denmark and Greenland’s self‑determination: EU and U.K. leaders said Greenland’s future is for Greenland and Denmark to decide. Source: Washington Post
- Starmer’s stance and calls: The U.K. prime minister told Trump Greenland isn’t America’s to claim, while acknowledging NATO can do more in the Arctic/“High North.” Sources: The Guardian; Sky News; No.10 readouts match this framing
- NATO language on deterring Russia: Starmer and NATO Sec‑Gen Mark Rutte agreed more must be done in the High North. Sources: UK gov; NATO
- Danish PM’s warning: If the U.S. attacked a NATO ally, “then everything stops,” a pointed allusion to NATO’s breaking point. Source: The Straits Times
- Greenlanders overwhelmingly oppose becoming U.S. territory; Greenlandic parties rejected any acquisition. Polling and statements reported by AP. Source: AP
Reported, but not fully corroborated
- Dearlove’s TalkTV lines: The 100‑year lease idea and a “strong argument” for more U.S. forces in Greenland were widely reported, but we couldn’t locate a primary TalkTV video or transcript. Treat as unconfirmed quotes for now. Source trail: Breitbart; secondary write‑ups
- “Make concessions” phrasing and a single‑word “definitely” endorsement of annexation: Not verified in primary footage. Secondary paraphrases exist, but direct quotes are unconfirmed.
- Alaska/Louisiana “precedents” cited by Dearlove: Historically correct as U.S. purchases, but attribution to Dearlove is unconfirmed without a primary source.
Key corrections and context
- Bold correction: Ownership isn’t necessary for security. The U.S. already has major basing and radar rights at Pituffik/Thule under a 1951 defense agreement. That’s why many experts call a takeover unnecessary and divisive for NATO. Sources: Washington Post; AP
- Bold correction: NATO is strained, not “torn apart.” Language like “frantically” or “tear apart” is editorial spin. The risk is real if force were used, but the alliance still stands. Source: The Straits Times
- Bold clarification: Trump’s rhetoric escalated the fight. Reports quote him saying the U.S. would act on Greenland “whether they like it or not,” intensifying European backlash. Source: The Guardian
The story, in simple terms Imagine your neighbor already has a key to your garage because you signed an agreement decades ago—so they can safely store gear that protects both your homes. Now they say they need to own your whole house to keep the block safe. That’s the Greenland debate in a nutshell.
- The U.S. already has what it needs in Greenland for Arctic defense (Thule/Pituffik, early warning systems).
- A lease or annexation wouldn’t add much militarily, experts say—but it would spark a political earthquake across NATO.
- Greenland’s people and Denmark have said the decision is theirs—and they’re saying no.
What we can say with confidence
- Sir Richard Dearlove appears to support significantly expanding U.S. military presence in Greenland and reportedly suggested a long lease to the U.S. to deter China/Russia. This aligns with the thrust of quoted remarks, but some lines remain unverified without a TalkTV primary.
- European leaders, Greenlandic officials, and the U.K. prime minister firmly oppose any U.S. acquisition. They underline self‑determination and warn of NATO rupture if force is used.
- The “European security” argument faces a practical counterpoint: the U.S. already has deep access in Greenland under existing treaties, making ownership more symbolic than strategic.
What still needs more reporting
- The original TalkTV video or transcript of Dearlove’s interview. Until we see it, treat precise quotes like “definitely” or the Alaska/Louisiana comparison as unconfirmed.
- Details of any U.S.–Denmark backchannel talks about Arctic posture short of ownership—additional assets, exercises, or basing within the current treaty framework.
How we checked
- We traced the quotes about a 100‑year lease back to partisan and secondary outlets and searched for a TalkTV clip/transcript. None surfaced at time of publication. We’ll update if a primary source appears.
- We cross‑checked government readouts, mainstream reporting, and polling on Greenland’s public opinion.
Why this matters Greenland sits on NATO’s front porch to the Arctic and the North Atlantic, where Russian subs, missile routes, and undersea cables converge. Strengthening defense there makes sense. But annexation—or even a provocative lease—could shatter unity when NATO is already bracing against Russia. The easier path: do more in the High North under the 1951 agreement that already lets the U.S. operate at Thule, without trampling Greenlandic consent.
Bottom line
- Dearlove’s push for a bigger U.S. role in Greenland squares with growing Arctic anxieties. But the headline claim that he endorsed giving Trump “control” of Greenland rests on quotes we can’t yet verify from a primary source.
- Europe’s message is unmistakable: security in the Arctic must not come at the expense of Greenlanders’ choice—or NATO’s cohesion.
Sources and further reading
- Washington Post on Maduro operation: https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2026/01/03/venezuela-maduro-capture-inside-raid/
- AP on Maduro charges: https://apnews.com/article/131f59e517cc8314a53c8dace230d328
- Guardian on Starmer’s stance: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/jan/05/keir-starmer-backs-danish-pm-donald-trump-threats-us-greenland-denmark
- Sky News readout: https://news.sky.com/story/starmer-says-more-needs-to-be-done-to-protect-the-arctic-in-call-to-trump-13492200
- UK gov readout with NATO SG: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/pm-call-with-nato-secretary-general-mark-rutte-8-january-2026
- NATO on “quantum leap” defense posture: https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/news_236155.htm
- Straits Times on Danish PM warning: https://www.straitstimes.com/world/europe/denmarks-prime-minister-says-trump-is-serious-about-wanting-greenland-takeover
- Washington Post on European pushback: https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2026/01/06/trump-european-union-greenland-denmark/97ed8fe8-eaf7-11f0-91a9-9928b22be817_story.html
- AP on Greenland opposition/polling: https://apnews.com/article/61eeb97b7199548e3aa13ef9f5c9d545
- Washington Post explainer on why Denmark won’t sell: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/08/17/why-denmark-wont-sell-off-greenland/
- AP on existing U.S. access at Thule: https://apnews.com/article/86790903847fc8ffc27334ccb64985a9
- Guardian on Trump’s escalatory rhetoric: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/jan/09/trump-greenland-threats-white-house
- Reported source for Dearlove quotes (not independently verified): https://www.breitbart.com/europe/2026/01/10/former-british-spy-chief-backs-trumps-efforts-to-take-control-of-greenland/
- Secondary aggregation on Dearlove coverage: https://www.upday.com/uk/world/trump-us-will-act-on-greenland-whether-they-like-it-or-not/09pw9cb
We’ll keep watching for the TalkTV primary. Until then, treat the most explosive quotes as reported—but not confirmed.