**Trader consensus favoring "No" at 72% reflects persistent diplomatic and legal barriers to a comprehensive U.S.-Greenland acquisition deal by year-end 2026.** Denmark and Greenland have repeatedly rejected any transfer of sovereignty, maintaining that the territory is not for sale and emphasizing self-determination under the Danish Realm. Official statements from Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen and Greenlandic authorities have consistently prioritized constructive dialogue on Arctic security without conceding ownership. Recent developments underscore the gap between rhetoric and outcomes. Following January 2026 tariff threats and a Davos meeting with NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte, President Trump announced a "framework" for enhanced U.S. access, basing rights, mineral interests, and involvement in missile defense initiatives like the Golden Dome. This led to de-escalation on tariffs but produced no binding purchase agreement. Negotiations have since focused on updating the 1951 defense pact and joint efforts against Russian or Chinese influence rather than full territorial acquisition. By mid-2026, momentum slowed further. Renewed U.S. pressure at the July NATO summit yielded no breakthrough, while Greenland authorities in August delayed drilling plans by a Trump-linked firm, citing regulatory requirements. These factors—combined with Greenland's small population, strong local opposition (historically around 85% against U.S. takeover), and complex international legal constraints—support the market's assessment that a signed deal meeting the December 31 deadline remains improbable absent major unforeseen concessions.
สรุปจาก AI ทดลองที่อ้างอิงข้อมูลจาก Polymarket ไม่ใช่คำแนะนำในการเทรดและไม่มีผลต่อการตัดสินตลาดนี้ · อัปเดตแล้ว28% โอกาส
$94,804 ปริมาณ
$94,804 ปริมาณ
Dec 30, 2026
28% โอกาส
$94,804 ปริมาณ
$94,804 ปริมาณ
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 consensus favoring "No" at 72% reflects persistent diplomatic and legal barriers to a comprehensive U.S.-Greenland acquisition deal by year-end 2026.** Denmark and Greenland have repeatedly rejected any transfer of sovereignty, maintaining that the territory is not for sale and emphasizing self-determination under the Danish Realm. Official statements from Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen and Greenlandic authorities have consistently prioritized constructive dialogue on Arctic security without conceding ownership.
Recent developments underscore the gap between rhetoric and outcomes. Following January 2026 tariff threats and a Davos meeting with NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte, President Trump announced a "framework" for enhanced U.S. access, basing rights, mineral interests, and involvement in missile defense initiatives like the Golden Dome. This led to de-escalation on tariffs but produced no binding purchase agreement. Negotiations have since focused on updating the 1951 defense pact and joint efforts against Russian or Chinese influence rather than full territorial acquisition.
By mid-2026, momentum slowed further. Renewed U.S. pressure at the July NATO summit yielded no breakthrough, while Greenland authorities in August delayed drilling plans by a Trump-linked firm, citing regulatory requirements. These factors—combined with Greenland's small population, strong local opposition (historically around 85% against U.S. takeover), and complex international legal constraints—support the market's assessment that a signed deal meeting the December 31 deadline remains improbable absent major unforeseen concessions.
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.
ตลาดเปิดเมื่อ: Jan 21, 2026, 5:59 PM ET
ปริมาณการซื้อขาย
$94,804วันสิ้นสุด
Dec 31, 2026ตลาดเปิดเมื่อ
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 consensus favoring "No" at 72% reflects persistent diplomatic and legal barriers to a comprehensive U.S.-Greenland acquisition deal by year-end 2026.** Denmark and Greenland have repeatedly rejected any transfer of sovereignty, maintaining that the territory is not for sale and emphasizing self-determination under the Danish Realm. Official statements from Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen and Greenlandic authorities have consistently prioritized constructive dialogue on Arctic security without conceding ownership.
Recent developments underscore the gap between rhetoric and outcomes. Following January 2026 tariff threats and a Davos meeting with NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte, President Trump announced a "framework" for enhanced U.S. access, basing rights, mineral interests, and involvement in missile defense initiatives like the Golden Dome. This led to de-escalation on tariffs but produced no binding purchase agreement. Negotiations have since focused on updating the 1951 defense pact and joint efforts against Russian or Chinese influence rather than full territorial acquisition.
By mid-2026, momentum slowed further. Renewed U.S. pressure at the July NATO summit yielded no breakthrough, while Greenland authorities in August delayed drilling plans by a Trump-linked firm, citing regulatory requirements. These factors—combined with Greenland's small population, strong local opposition (historically around 85% against U.S. takeover), and complex international legal constraints—support the market's assessment that a signed deal meeting the December 31 deadline remains improbable absent major unforeseen concessions.
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.
ปริมาณการซื้อขาย
$94,804วันสิ้นสุด
Dec 31, 2026ตลาดเปิดเมื่อ
Jan 21, 2026, 5:59 PM ETResolver
0x65070BE91...**Trader consensus favoring "No" at 72% reflects persistent diplomatic and legal barriers to a comprehensive U.S.-Greenland acquisition deal by year-end 2026.** Denmark and Greenland have repeatedly rejected any transfer of sovereignty, maintaining that the territory is not for sale and emphasizing self-determination under the Danish Realm. Official statements from Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen and Greenlandic authorities have consistently prioritized constructive dialogue on Arctic security without conceding ownership. Recent developments underscore the gap between rhetoric and outcomes. Following January 2026 tariff threats and a Davos meeting with NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte, President Trump announced a "framework" for enhanced U.S. access, basing rights, mineral interests, and involvement in missile defense initiatives like the Golden Dome. This led to de-escalation on tariffs but produced no binding purchase agreement. Negotiations have since focused on updating the 1951 defense pact and joint efforts against Russian or Chinese influence rather than full territorial acquisition. By mid-2026, momentum slowed further. Renewed U.S. pressure at the July NATO summit yielded no breakthrough, while Greenland authorities in August delayed drilling plans by a Trump-linked firm, citing regulatory requirements. These factors—combined with Greenland's small population, strong local opposition (historically around 85% against U.S. takeover), and complex international legal constraints—support the market's assessment that a signed deal meeting the December 31 deadline remains improbable absent major unforeseen concessions.
สรุปจาก AI ทดลองที่อ้างอิงข้อมูลจาก Polymarket ไม่ใช่คำแนะนำในการเทรดและไม่มีผลต่อการตัดสินตลาดนี้ · อัปเดตแล้ว
ระวังลิงก์ภายนอก
ระวังลิงก์ภายนอก
คำถามที่พบบ่อย