Trump Takes America First to Davos

President Trump’s appearance at the World Economic Forum in Davos was never going to be a gesture of harmony. Davos exists to celebrate globalization, multilateral governance, and post-national economics. Trump arrived to challenge those assumptions head-on. His message was unmistakable: the age of frictionless globalism is over, and strong nation-states—not elite consensus—remain the foundation of global security.

Trump did not soften his worldview for the Davos audience. He brought America First directly into the heart of elite globalism and used the platform to argue that sovereignty, geography, and power still matter more than process, norms, or institutional comfort.

That clash was clearest in how Trump framed Greenland.

Rather than presenting Greenland as a resource opportunity or economic acquisition, Trump explicitly rejected that framing. “This is not about critical minerals,” he said. “This is about national security and strategic locations.” In one sentence, Trump dismantled the Davos tendency to reduce security questions to markets, supply chains, and technocratic management.

Instead, he returned the discussion to first principles: maps and power.

Trump argued that geography—long dismissed by globalists as increasingly irrelevant - has reasserted itself as decisive. As Arctic ice recedes, the High North is no longer a remote frontier. Arctic sea lanes are opening, transatlantic trade routes are shifting northward, and undersea cables and infrastructure critical to the global economy are becoming more exposed. Greenland, sitting at the intersection of North America, Europe, and the Arctic, is no longer peripheral. It is central.

“It’s about the position, the location, and the safety of the United States and the world,” Trump said. That line captured the philosophical divide between Trump and the Davos worldview. Where elite globalism emphasizes integration and interdependence, Trump emphasized control, access, and security rooted in physical space.

Trump also directly tied Greenland to great-power competition. “You look at Greenland on the map—you look at Russia, you look at the Arctic—it’s obvious how important it is.” Russia has steadily militarized the Arctic, expanding bases, missile coverage, and icebreaker fleets. China, despite not being an Arctic nation, has declared itself a “near-Arctic state” and invested heavily in polar research and infrastructure. In Trump’s telling, ignoring Greenland is not enlightened globalism—it is strategic blindness.

This framing unsettled the Davos audience because it rejects a core assumption of elite globalism: that competition can be watered-down through institutions, dialogue, and shared norms. Trump’s America First worldview assumes the opposite—that competition is structural and permanent, and that stability depends on power, positioning, and the ability to secure critical geography.

Trump extended this logic to alliances, particularly NATO. When he said, “Greenland is very important for international security” and “We have to protect the Western Hemisphere,” critics heard unilateralism. But Trump was articulating a different concept: strategic division of labor.

Under this approach, alliances are strengthened not by pretending every member can do everything everywhere, but by assigning responsibility based on capability and geography. The United States, with unmatched naval, air, space, and Arctic capabilities, is uniquely positioned to secure the Western Hemisphere and the High North—protecting airspace, sea lanes, and undersea infrastructure that underpin global commerce. European allies, facing immediate land-based threats, can concentrate their political and military resources on conflicts within their own hemisphere, particularly Ukraine.

Both efforts confront the same adversaries—Russia and China—but along different geographic fronts. That is not alliance abandonment. It is burden-shifting grounded in reality.

This remark from President Trump’s underscored the point: “The United States is the only country in the world that can properly protect Greenland.” To Davos elites, such language is undermining, even confrontational. But stripped of politics, it reflects an uncomfortable truth. No other NATO member has the reach, logistics, intelligence, or military capacity required to secure Greenland at scale. Acknowledging that reality challenges the beliefs that often dominate elite global discussion.

The deeper reason Trump’s appearance rattled Davos is that it exposed the limits of globalism without power. Institutions cannot secure sea lanes or patrol airspace. Consensus cannot deter adversaries. Those tasks still fall to states willing to exercise sovereignty and bear responsibility.

Trump did not go to Davos to join the consensus. He went to confront it. In doing so, he made clear that America First is not a rejection of global responsibility, but a rejection of the idea that global stability can exist without strong nations enforcing it.

Greenland was not a sideshow. It was the point. And Davos, faced with a world where geography and power once again dominate, will find that Trump’s message reflects hard reality.