**Trader sentiment on the "Trump x Greenland deal signed by December 31" market favors "No" at 72.5% primarily because Denmark and Greenland have repeatedly rejected any transfer of sovereignty, while the January 2026 "framework" announced by President Trump centers on enhanced U.S. military access and Arctic cooperation rather than a purchase or control agreement.** In mid-to-late January 2026, Trump escalated pressure with tariff threats on Denmark and other European allies tied to acquiring Greenland for national security and missile defense reasons. Following talks with NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte, he announced a vague "framework of a future deal" on Greenland and the broader Arctic region, withdrew the tariffs, and shifted emphasis toward joint defense efforts, possible new basing arrangements, and U.S. access under updated agreements like the 1951 defense pact. Danish officials signaled willingness for constructive dialogue on security but maintained that Greenland is not for sale. No further verifiable progress on a signed deal has emerged in the months since. Greenlandic and Danish positions remain firm against sovereignty changes, and any comprehensive agreement would require trilateral negotiations, congressional involvement in the U.S., and alignment on terms that go well beyond military basing. These structural and diplomatic barriers sustain the market's current pricing, reflecting trader assessment that a qualifying deal by year-end is unlikely absent major new concessions or breakthroughs.
Ringkasan eksperimental yang dihasilkan AI dengan referensi data Polymarket. Ini bukan saran trading dan tidak berperan dalam bagaimana pasar ini diselesaikan. · Diperbarui28% peluang
$94,804 Vol.
$94,804 Vol.
Dec 30, 2026
28% peluang
$94,804 Vol.
$94,804 Vol.
Dec 30, 2026
This market will resolve to “Yes” if both Denmark and the United States sign a deal, treaty, or similar international agreement of any kind relating to Greenland by December 31, 2026, 11:59 PM ET. Otherwise, this market will resolve to “No”.
Any U.S.–Danish agreement relating to Greenland will qualify, regardless of subject matter, including but not limited to sovereignty, governance, security arrangements, or access to natural resources.
Examples of qualifying deals include but are not limited to a treaty that makes any portion of Greenland a U.S. territory or possession (even if the handover date for such territory or possession is later); or, a Guantánamo-style arrangement treaty establishing a defined zone in Greenland under exclusive or primary U.S. jurisdiction and control, where Denmark and Greenland’s ordinary legal authority does not apply except by U.S. permission; or agreements permitting additional U.S. troop stationing, basing access, or resource extraction rights in Greenland.
This market will resolve to “Yes” only if a qualifying agreement is formally signed by authorized representatives of both Denmark and the United States. Official announcements, statements of intent, or declarations that an agreement has been reached will not suffice unless accompanied by signatures from both sides. Whether or not a qualifying deal is later passed by the respective parliaments or enters into force will not affect this market’s resolution. Signaling from Greenland’s population will not be considered.
Announcements, negotiations, proposals, frameworks, or understandings that are not formally signed by both parties will not qualify. Any qualifying U.S. jurisdiction, control, basing rights, or access arrangements in Greenland that existed at market creation will not count as new qualifying agreements.
The primary resolution source for this market will be official information from the governments of the United States and Denmark; however, a consensus of credible reporting may also be used.**Trader sentiment on the "Trump x Greenland deal signed by December 31" market favors "No" at 72.5% primarily because Denmark and Greenland have repeatedly rejected any transfer of sovereignty, while the January 2026 "framework" announced by President Trump centers on enhanced U.S. military access and Arctic cooperation rather than a purchase or control agreement.**
In mid-to-late January 2026, Trump escalated pressure with tariff threats on Denmark and other European allies tied to acquiring Greenland for national security and missile defense reasons. Following talks with NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte, he announced a vague "framework of a future deal" on Greenland and the broader Arctic region, withdrew the tariffs, and shifted emphasis toward joint defense efforts, possible new basing arrangements, and U.S. access under updated agreements like the 1951 defense pact. Danish officials signaled willingness for constructive dialogue on security but maintained that Greenland is not for sale.
No further verifiable progress on a signed deal has emerged in the months since. Greenlandic and Danish positions remain firm against sovereignty changes, and any comprehensive agreement would require trilateral negotiations, congressional involvement in the U.S., and alignment on terms that go well beyond military basing. These structural and diplomatic barriers sustain the market's current pricing, reflecting trader assessment that a qualifying deal by year-end is unlikely absent major new concessions or breakthroughs.
This market will resolve to “Yes” if both Denmark and the United States sign a deal, treaty, or similar international agreement of any kind relating to Greenland by December 31, 2026, 11:59 PM ET. Otherwise, this market will resolve to “No”.
Any U.S.–Danish agreement relating to Greenland will qualify, regardless of subject matter, including but not limited to sovereignty, governance, security arrangements, or access to natural resources.
Examples of qualifying deals include but are not limited to a treaty that makes any portion of Greenland a U.S. territory or possession (even if the handover date for such territory or possession is later); or, a Guantánamo-style arrangement treaty establishing a defined zone in Greenland under exclusive or primary U.S. jurisdiction and control, where Denmark and Greenland’s ordinary legal authority does not apply except by U.S. permission; or agreements permitting additional U.S. troop stationing, basing access, or resource extraction rights in Greenland.
This market will resolve to “Yes” only if a qualifying agreement is formally signed by authorized representatives of both Denmark and the United States. Official announcements, statements of intent, or declarations that an agreement has been reached will not suffice unless accompanied by signatures from both sides. Whether or not a qualifying deal is later passed by the respective parliaments or enters into force will not affect this market’s resolution. Signaling from Greenland’s population will not be considered.
Announcements, negotiations, proposals, frameworks, or understandings that are not formally signed by both parties will not qualify. Any qualifying U.S. jurisdiction, control, basing rights, or access arrangements in Greenland that existed at market creation will not count as new qualifying agreements.
The primary resolution source for this market will be official information from the governments of the United States and Denmark; however, a consensus of credible reporting may also be used.
Any U.S.–Danish agreement relating to Greenland will qualify, regardless of subject matter, including but not limited to sovereignty, governance, security arrangements, or access to natural resources.
Examples of qualifying deals include but are not limited to a treaty that makes any portion of Greenland a U.S. territory or possession (even if the handover date for such territory or possession is later); or, a Guantánamo-style arrangement treaty establishing a defined zone in Greenland under exclusive or primary U.S. jurisdiction and control, where Denmark and Greenland’s ordinary legal authority does not apply except by U.S. permission; or agreements permitting additional U.S. troop stationing, basing access, or resource extraction rights in Greenland.
This market will resolve to “Yes” only if a qualifying agreement is formally signed by authorized representatives of both Denmark and the United States. Official announcements, statements of intent, or declarations that an agreement has been reached will not suffice unless accompanied by signatures from both sides. Whether or not a qualifying deal is later passed by the respective parliaments or enters into force will not affect this market’s resolution. Signaling from Greenland’s population will not be considered.
Announcements, negotiations, proposals, frameworks, or understandings that are not formally signed by both parties will not qualify. Any qualifying U.S. jurisdiction, control, basing rights, or access arrangements in Greenland that existed at market creation will not count as new qualifying agreements.
The primary resolution source for this market will be official information from the governments of the United States and Denmark; however, a consensus of credible reporting may also be used.
Pasar Dibuka: Jan 21, 2026, 5:59 PM ET
Volume
$94,804Tanggal Berakhir
Dec 31, 2026Pasar Dibuka
Jan 21, 2026, 5:59 PM ETResolver
0x65070BE91...This market will resolve to “Yes” if both Denmark and the United States sign a deal, treaty, or similar international agreement of any kind relating to Greenland by December 31, 2026, 11:59 PM ET. Otherwise, this market will resolve to “No”.
Any U.S.–Danish agreement relating to Greenland will qualify, regardless of subject matter, including but not limited to sovereignty, governance, security arrangements, or access to natural resources.
Examples of qualifying deals include but are not limited to a treaty that makes any portion of Greenland a U.S. territory or possession (even if the handover date for such territory or possession is later); or, a Guantánamo-style arrangement treaty establishing a defined zone in Greenland under exclusive or primary U.S. jurisdiction and control, where Denmark and Greenland’s ordinary legal authority does not apply except by U.S. permission; or agreements permitting additional U.S. troop stationing, basing access, or resource extraction rights in Greenland.
This market will resolve to “Yes” only if a qualifying agreement is formally signed by authorized representatives of both Denmark and the United States. Official announcements, statements of intent, or declarations that an agreement has been reached will not suffice unless accompanied by signatures from both sides. Whether or not a qualifying deal is later passed by the respective parliaments or enters into force will not affect this market’s resolution. Signaling from Greenland’s population will not be considered.
Announcements, negotiations, proposals, frameworks, or understandings that are not formally signed by both parties will not qualify. Any qualifying U.S. jurisdiction, control, basing rights, or access arrangements in Greenland that existed at market creation will not count as new qualifying agreements.
The primary resolution source for this market will be official information from the governments of the United States and Denmark; however, a consensus of credible reporting may also be used.**Trader sentiment on the "Trump x Greenland deal signed by December 31" market favors "No" at 72.5% primarily because Denmark and Greenland have repeatedly rejected any transfer of sovereignty, while the January 2026 "framework" announced by President Trump centers on enhanced U.S. military access and Arctic cooperation rather than a purchase or control agreement.**
In mid-to-late January 2026, Trump escalated pressure with tariff threats on Denmark and other European allies tied to acquiring Greenland for national security and missile defense reasons. Following talks with NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte, he announced a vague "framework of a future deal" on Greenland and the broader Arctic region, withdrew the tariffs, and shifted emphasis toward joint defense efforts, possible new basing arrangements, and U.S. access under updated agreements like the 1951 defense pact. Danish officials signaled willingness for constructive dialogue on security but maintained that Greenland is not for sale.
No further verifiable progress on a signed deal has emerged in the months since. Greenlandic and Danish positions remain firm against sovereignty changes, and any comprehensive agreement would require trilateral negotiations, congressional involvement in the U.S., and alignment on terms that go well beyond military basing. These structural and diplomatic barriers sustain the market's current pricing, reflecting trader assessment that a qualifying deal by year-end is unlikely absent major new concessions or breakthroughs.
This market will resolve to “Yes” if both Denmark and the United States sign a deal, treaty, or similar international agreement of any kind relating to Greenland by December 31, 2026, 11:59 PM ET. Otherwise, this market will resolve to “No”.
Any U.S.–Danish agreement relating to Greenland will qualify, regardless of subject matter, including but not limited to sovereignty, governance, security arrangements, or access to natural resources.
Examples of qualifying deals include but are not limited to a treaty that makes any portion of Greenland a U.S. territory or possession (even if the handover date for such territory or possession is later); or, a Guantánamo-style arrangement treaty establishing a defined zone in Greenland under exclusive or primary U.S. jurisdiction and control, where Denmark and Greenland’s ordinary legal authority does not apply except by U.S. permission; or agreements permitting additional U.S. troop stationing, basing access, or resource extraction rights in Greenland.
This market will resolve to “Yes” only if a qualifying agreement is formally signed by authorized representatives of both Denmark and the United States. Official announcements, statements of intent, or declarations that an agreement has been reached will not suffice unless accompanied by signatures from both sides. Whether or not a qualifying deal is later passed by the respective parliaments or enters into force will not affect this market’s resolution. Signaling from Greenland’s population will not be considered.
Announcements, negotiations, proposals, frameworks, or understandings that are not formally signed by both parties will not qualify. Any qualifying U.S. jurisdiction, control, basing rights, or access arrangements in Greenland that existed at market creation will not count as new qualifying agreements.
The primary resolution source for this market will be official information from the governments of the United States and Denmark; however, a consensus of credible reporting may also be used.
Any U.S.–Danish agreement relating to Greenland will qualify, regardless of subject matter, including but not limited to sovereignty, governance, security arrangements, or access to natural resources.
Examples of qualifying deals include but are not limited to a treaty that makes any portion of Greenland a U.S. territory or possession (even if the handover date for such territory or possession is later); or, a Guantánamo-style arrangement treaty establishing a defined zone in Greenland under exclusive or primary U.S. jurisdiction and control, where Denmark and Greenland’s ordinary legal authority does not apply except by U.S. permission; or agreements permitting additional U.S. troop stationing, basing access, or resource extraction rights in Greenland.
This market will resolve to “Yes” only if a qualifying agreement is formally signed by authorized representatives of both Denmark and the United States. Official announcements, statements of intent, or declarations that an agreement has been reached will not suffice unless accompanied by signatures from both sides. Whether or not a qualifying deal is later passed by the respective parliaments or enters into force will not affect this market’s resolution. Signaling from Greenland’s population will not be considered.
Announcements, negotiations, proposals, frameworks, or understandings that are not formally signed by both parties will not qualify. Any qualifying U.S. jurisdiction, control, basing rights, or access arrangements in Greenland that existed at market creation will not count as new qualifying agreements.
The primary resolution source for this market will be official information from the governments of the United States and Denmark; however, a consensus of credible reporting may also be used.
Volume
$94,804Tanggal Berakhir
Dec 31, 2026Pasar Dibuka
Jan 21, 2026, 5:59 PM ETResolver
0x65070BE91...**Trader sentiment on the "Trump x Greenland deal signed by December 31" market favors "No" at 72.5% primarily because Denmark and Greenland have repeatedly rejected any transfer of sovereignty, while the January 2026 "framework" announced by President Trump centers on enhanced U.S. military access and Arctic cooperation rather than a purchase or control agreement.** In mid-to-late January 2026, Trump escalated pressure with tariff threats on Denmark and other European allies tied to acquiring Greenland for national security and missile defense reasons. Following talks with NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte, he announced a vague "framework of a future deal" on Greenland and the broader Arctic region, withdrew the tariffs, and shifted emphasis toward joint defense efforts, possible new basing arrangements, and U.S. access under updated agreements like the 1951 defense pact. Danish officials signaled willingness for constructive dialogue on security but maintained that Greenland is not for sale. No further verifiable progress on a signed deal has emerged in the months since. Greenlandic and Danish positions remain firm against sovereignty changes, and any comprehensive agreement would require trilateral negotiations, congressional involvement in the U.S., and alignment on terms that go well beyond military basing. These structural and diplomatic barriers sustain the market's current pricing, reflecting trader assessment that a qualifying deal by year-end is unlikely absent major new concessions or breakthroughs.
Ringkasan eksperimental yang dihasilkan AI dengan referensi data Polymarket. Ini bukan saran trading dan tidak berperan dalam bagaimana pasar ini diselesaikan. · Diperbarui
Hati-hati dengan link eksternal.
Hati-hati dengan link eksternal.
Pertanyaan yang Sering Diajukan