Greenland Documentary Sparks Debate on Danish Colonial History

A recent documentary titled “Grønlands hvide guld” (Greenland’s White Gold) has ignited discussions about Denmark's colonial past, particularly its exploitation of the cryolite mine in southern Greenland. The film, which aired briefly in February 2025, has since been removed from Danish public television due to controversy surrounding its claims.

Documentary Overview

The 55-minute film, produced by Michael Bévort, highlights Denmark's decades-long extraction of resources from Greenland, a territory still under Danish rule. The documentary presents the unsettling narrative of how the mine in Ivittuut generated substantial profits for Denmark, amounting to an estimated 400 billion Danish kroner (approximately £46 billion) over 133 years. This figure, derived from historical logbooks, represents gross revenue rather than profit, as expenses were incurred in Denmark.

The film’s timing was significant, coinciding with heightened tensions surrounding Donald Trump's interest in acquiring Greenland. In the midst of an election season, the documentary resonated strongly within Greenland, prompting a mix of anger, sadness, and a sense of validation among viewers who felt their historical accounts were finally acknowledged.

Polarized Reactions

The reaction in Greenland stood in stark contrast to that in Denmark. While many Greenlanders expressed frustration over historical injustices and felt a renewed sense of identity, the Danish response was critical. Following a wave of backlash, especially from economists questioning the film's figures, Danish media scrutiny intensified.

Torben M Andersen, an economist featured in the documentary, cautioned against the portrayal of the financial data, calling it misleading. This prompted DR, Denmark's public broadcaster, to initially uphold the documentary’s integrity but eventually led to its retraction after concerns about accuracy surfaced. News director Sandy French later stated that new information regarding a graph on sales data contributed to the decision, citing the importance of accurate representation.

Simmering Tensions

The decision to withdraw the documentary has sparked further controversy. Critics accuse DR of prioritizing its corporate reputation over public discourse. Rune Lykkeberg, editor-in-chief of Danish newspaper Information, described the move as a "terrible decision," emphasizing the need for public accessibility to a film that addresses important historical issues.

Naaja Nathanielsen, a former Greenlandic minister, expressed disappointment in DR's response, suggesting it reflects Denmark's discomfort with its colonial legacy. She asserted that the documentary did not misrepresent Greenland's economic relationship with Denmark, positing that both positive and negative aspects of this history deserve recognition.

A Complex Narrative

This unfolding dialogue illustrates the complex relationship between Greenland and Denmark, characterized by shared history and divergent perspectives. Many Greenlanders feel that a balanced discussion should acknowledge past grievances alongside the benefits of Danish investment, which complicates the narrative commonly accepted in Denmark.

As the documentary gains attention, it continues to encourage critical examination of Denmark's colonial past, prompting both nations to confront a shared history that shapes their current relationship. Whether the documentary will find a new platform remains to be seen, but its impact on the conversation about colonialism and exploitation in Greenland is undeniable.

DR and the Danish minister for culture have not yet commented on the situation, leaving the discourse open for further public input and examination. The ongoing reactions from both Greenland and Denmark highlight a pivotal moment in the reassessment of historical narratives that influence modern identities and political discussions.