ANCHORAGE, Alaska (KTUU) — President Donald Trump said Wednesday he has “formed the framework of a future deal” on Greenland following meetings with NATO leadership, while also ruling out military force to acquire the Danish territory. The announcement signals a strategic shift in his approach, even as tensions with U.S. Arctic allies remain strained over his aggressive pursuit of control over the resource-rich island.

Speaking at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, Trump doubled down on his interest in Greenland as part of broader Arctic security strategy, though he acknowledged the long-term nature of any potential agreement.

“It’s a long-term deal. It’s the ultimate long-term deal, and I think it puts everybody in a really good position, especially as it pertains to security and minerals and everything else,” Trump said.

De-escalation after heated rhetoric

Trump’s announcement that he would roll back threatened tariffs on NATO countries that opposed his Greenland ambitions represents a significant cooling of rhetoric that has dominated discussion for weeks, according to security experts.

Cameron Carlson, dean of the College of Business and Security Management at the University of Alaska Fairbanks, characterized the shift as a necessary step toward restoring international relationships damaged by the president’s aggressive posture.

“I think it’s a signaling to the recognition that President Trump has been able to bring things to a very heated boil,” Carlson said. “Having the rhetoric basically start to cool down, that we will not take military action as he indicated while he was there in Davos, is a tremendous step forward in the relations that we have with our fellow Arctic countries.”

Carlson cautioned that damage to diplomatic relationships with Europe and NATO remains significant.

“I think it’s globally important as well that this starts to basically de-escalate to the point where more focused discussions can take place in terms of how we actually can work with Greenland,” he said.

The Strategic Interest: Rare Earth Minerals and Security

While Trump has emphasized security concerns in Greenland, Carlson said the economic dimension—particularly access to rare earth minerals—appears to be the real driving force behind U.S. interest.

“From an economic perspective, it clearly blunts our ability to partner with countries that are in the region, not just Greenland, but Denmark as well,” Carlson said. “There is a real spillover potential for Alaska in terms of defense spending.”

The Trump administration’s focus on rare earths reflects broader geopolitical competition with China, which currently dominates the global market for these critical minerals essential to modern technology. Carlson explained the stakes.

“Everything that we have come to depend on today, whether it is our cell phone, our computer, our televisions, our automobiles, everything is highly dependent upon our ability to access rare earths.”

Unlike precious metals with concentrated deposits, rare earths require extensive extraction and processing across large areas to yield relatively small amounts of usable material—a process that can take decades and carries significant environmental consequences.

Alaska’s Role and the Golden Dome

Carlson stressed that what makes the United States an Arctic actor is not Washington, but Alaska’s geographic position.

“While that may seem very commonsensical to individuals that live here in Alaska, if you were to look at the lower 48, some individuals would probably say, ‘I failed to see what the real interests of the United States are,’” he said.

Alaska’s strategic importance stems from its vast territory, proximity to Russia, and control over shipping through the Bering Strait—factors that could position the state as a hub for Arctic security infrastructure.

This context makes the “Golden Dome,” a $175 billion missile defense system sponsored by Alaska Sen. Dan Sullivan, a potential “win” for the Trump administration that would also benefit Alaska, according to Carlson.

“Having infrastructure developed here would be a win for the Trump Administration,” Carlson said. “It would likewise be a big win for us in a security context as well, nationally, as it would be for our allies within NATO and our Arctic partners.”

Carlson suggested the Golden Dome represents an alternative pathway forward, noting that, “Alaska is going to be a key component of what we do or what we end up doing when it comes to the Golden Dome,” and could serve as “an off ramp to this where we realize some of the benefit of what will happen in that economic development.”

The Greenland Sovereignty Question

The people of Greenland complicated the rare earth equation when they voted against a mining project in recent elections, signaling their preference for environmental protection over resource extraction. Greenland is not for sale, both the territory and its parent country Denmark have made clear.

Carlson acknowledged this reality.

“They are a sovereign nation, and they have the ability, as they should, for self-determination,” he said. “They have made it very, very clear that that is not for sale, that they want to determine what is going to be in the best interest of them and the territory that they are on over the long term.”

Even if the Trump administration views a dramatic deal as a win, Carlson says any path forward requires carefully navigating partnership with Greenland’s citizens.

“They’re going to have to very carefully navigate that process of taking a look at what it takes to basically partner with the citizens of Greenland if they really want to extract these rare earths and get access to this over the long term,” Carlson said.

A Path Forward

Carlson outlined what he sees as the best outcome: restoration of civil discourse and partnership with NATO, Denmark, and Greenland to develop resource-sharing arrangements that benefit all parties—though perhaps not in the near term.

“I think the easy win that the president could basically determine from this point is that he looks at Arctic security and reinvests in what some of the capabilities are that would provide that umbrella of Arctic security, not only within Greenland, but here in Alaska as well,” Carlson said.

Editor’s note: The Associated Press contributed to this report

Copyright 2026 KTUU. All rights reserved.

An aerial view of a large aggregation of adult beluga whales in a bay during the summer in the High Arctic. (Photo credit: Greg O’Corry-Crowe and Cortney Watt, Arctic Whale Research Program – FAU/DFO)

In the icy waters of Alaska’s Bristol Bay, a new study reveals how a small population of beluga whales (Delphinapterus leucas) survive the long haul through a surprising strategy: they mate with multiple partners over several years. The combination of long-term genetics, observation and careful analysis is starting to reveal some of the most intimate insights into one of the Arctic’s most elusive whales.

Beluga whales live in a world that’s difficult for scientists to observe, so surprisingly little is known about how they choose mates, compete for partners, or raise their young in the wild.

Researchers from Florida Atlantic University’s Harbor Branch Oceanographic Institute in collaboration with the Alaska Department of Fish and Game, and the North Slope Borough Department of Wildlife Management in Alaska, are the first to uncover how wild beluga whales mate, who fathers which calves, and how these reproductive strategies influence genetic diversity and inbreeding.

Over 13 years, researchers collected genetic samples from 623 beluga whales in Bristol Bay, while also observing their social groupings and ages. This population is composed of about 2,000 whales and is largely isolated, with little or no mixing with other populations, offering a unique opportunity to study them as a distinct population. 

Because belugas are long-lived, researchers focused on short-term mating strategies – what happens in a single breeding season or across a few years – rather than an entire lifetime. They wanted to determine if beluga whales in Bristol Bay were polygynous, where one male mates with multiple females; polyandrous, where one female mates with multiple males; or possibly polygynandrous, where both males and females have multiple mates.

Published in Frontiers in Marine Science, the study reveals that this beluga whale population engages in highly strategic mating – a polygynandrous system. Both males and females mate with multiple partners over several years. Variance in reproductive success among individuals is moderate rather than being dominated by just a few individuals. This “mate switching” results in many half-siblings and few full-siblings and may reduce the risk of inbreeding and help maintain genetic diversity despite the population’s small size and isolation.   

“What makes this study so thrilling is that it upends our long-standing assumptions about this Arctic species,” said Greg O’Corry-Crowe, Ph.D., senior author, a research professor of Wildlife Evolution and Behavior at FAU Harbor Branch and a National Geographic Explorer. “Because males are much larger than females and appear to spend little time associating with mothers and calves, scientists believed belugas were likely to be highly polygynous, where males spend a lot of time competing for mates and only a few dominant males fathering most of the calves. Our findings tell a very different story. In the short term, males are only moderately polygynous. One explanation we think lies in their incredible longevity – belugas can live perhaps 100 years or more. Rather than competing intensely in a single season, males appear to play the long game, spreading their reproductive efforts over many years. It appears to be a ‘take your time, there’s plenty of fish in the sea’ strategy.”

Meanwhile, findings from the study show that females have their own equally fascinating reproductive strategy. Rather than sticking with a single partner, they frequently switch mates from one breeding season to the next. This behavior may serve as a form of risk management, allowing females to avoid pairing with low-quality males and increasing the likelihood of producing healthy, genetically diverse offspring.

“It’s a striking reminder that female choice can be just as influential in shaping reproductive success as the often-highlighted battles of male-male competition,” said O’Corry-Crowe. “Such strategies highlight the subtle, yet powerful ways in which females exert control over the next generation, shaping the evolutionary trajectory of the species.”

Interestingly, researchers did not find any differences between older and younger adults in terms of how many had young calves in the population at any one time, for either males or females. However, older mothers had more surviving calves than younger ones, suggesting experience, body condition, and mate choice boost reproductive success. Most adults – male and female – had only a few offspring at a time, reflecting slow female reproduction, and the fact that males father only a small number of calves each year. 

The study underscores the importance of considering mating systems in conservation, especially for small or isolated populations. In polygynandrous systems, mate choice, partner switching, and shared reproductive opportunities spread genes more evenly, maintaining genetic diversity, limiting inbreeding, and offsetting the deleterious impacts of small effective population size. This helps buffer against genetic drift, which can otherwise erode diversity when only a few individuals reproduce.

“Understanding these dynamics matters for conservation. If only a few males father most calves, the effective population size becomes much smaller than the number of whales actually present,” said O’Corry-Crowe. “This loss of genetic diversity increases the risk of inbreeding and reduces the population’s ability to adapt to environmental change. Frequent mate switching combined with low reproductive ‘skew’ and possibly the active avoidance of mating with close relatives, may be effective strategies to maintaining the genetic health of relatively small populations.”

Much of the motivation for this study came from the Indigenous communities of Bristol Bay who worked with the team of scientists to conduct the research and to meld scientific research with Indigenous knowledge as a means to protect and co-manage beluga whales in a changing Arctic and sub-arctic. Their partnership was invaluable to the success of the project.

“We cannot afford to be complacent. Small populations still face the dangers of genetic erosion. But we can be optimistic that beluga whale mating strategies provide evidence of nature’s resilience and offers hope for those working to save and recover small populations of any species,” said O’Corry-Crowe.

Study co-authors are Lori Quakenbush, Alaska Department of Fish and Game, Arctic Marine Mammal Program; Tatiana Ferrer, coordinator of research programs, FAU Harbor Branch; and John J. Citta, Ph.D., and Anna Bryan, Alaska Department of Fish and Game, Arctic Marine Mammal Program.

This research was supported by the Alaska Beluga Whale Committee, the Alaska Department of Fish and Game, the National Marine Fisheries Service, the North Pacific Research Board, NOAA, and FAU Harbor Branch.  

//

Beluga whales in the High Arctic during the summer. A group of beluga whale bulls in a bay, followed by two cow-calf pairs in a shallow river estuary. An all-male group of beluga whale bulls swims alongside a female with a young calf, showing the size difference between adult males and females and the cream-gray color of the calf. The video ends with a large aggregation of adult beluga whales in a bay during the summer in the High Arctic. (Video Credit: Greg O’Corry-Crowe and Cortney Watt, Arctic Whale Research Program – FAU/DFO)

A group of beluga whale bulls in a bay during the summer in the High Arctic. (Photo credit: Greg O’Corry-Crowe and Cortney Watt, Arctic Whale Research Program – FAU/DFO)

Two beluga whale cow-calf pairs in a shallow river estuary in the High Arctic. (Photo credit: Greg O’Corry-Crowe and Cortney Watt, Arctic Whale Research Program – FAU/DFO)

-FAU-