Denmark and Greenland authorities have repeatedly affirmed that sovereignty over the territory remains non-negotiable, blocking any Trump-proposed acquisition deal despite U.S. diplomatic pressure and a vague January 2026 "framework" announcement with NATO on updating the 1951 defense agreement for expanded military access and mineral rights. With no binding bilateral agreement signed or imminent as of late March, and only days until the March 31 deadline, traders reflect near-certain consensus at 99.8% "No" probability, viewing entrenched opposition and procedural hurdles—including Greenland's self-rule and Danish parliamentary approval—as insurmountable. Realistic shifts would require an unforeseen concession from Copenhagen or late-breaking executive action, though historical precedents favor stasis in territorial disputes.
Resumen experimental generado por IA con datos de Polymarket · ActualizadoSí
$1,075,551 Vol.
$1,075,551 Vol.
Mar 31, 2026
Sí
$1,075,551 Vol.
$1,075,551 Vol.
Mar 31, 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 March 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.Denmark and Greenland authorities have repeatedly affirmed that sovereignty over the territory remains non-negotiable, blocking any Trump-proposed acquisition deal despite U.S. diplomatic pressure and a vague January 2026 "framework" announcement with NATO on updating the 1951 defense agreement for expanded military access and mineral rights. With no binding bilateral agreement signed or imminent as of late March, and only days until the March 31 deadline, traders reflect near-certain consensus at 99.8% "No" probability, viewing entrenched opposition and procedural hurdles—including Greenland's self-rule and Danish parliamentary approval—as insurmountable. Realistic shifts would require an unforeseen concession from Copenhagen or late-breaking executive action, though historical precedents favor stasis in territorial disputes.
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 March 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.
Mercado abierto: Jan 12, 2026, 7:18 PM ET
Volumen
$1,075,551Fecha de finalización
Mar 31, 2026Mercado abierto
Jan 12, 2026, 7:18 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 March 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.Denmark and Greenland authorities have repeatedly affirmed that sovereignty over the territory remains non-negotiable, blocking any Trump-proposed acquisition deal despite U.S. diplomatic pressure and a vague January 2026 "framework" announcement with NATO on updating the 1951 defense agreement for expanded military access and mineral rights. With no binding bilateral agreement signed or imminent as of late March, and only days until the March 31 deadline, traders reflect near-certain consensus at 99.8% "No" probability, viewing entrenched opposition and procedural hurdles—including Greenland's self-rule and Danish parliamentary approval—as insurmountable. Realistic shifts would require an unforeseen concession from Copenhagen or late-breaking executive action, though historical precedents favor stasis in territorial disputes.
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 March 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.
Volumen
$1,075,551Fecha de finalización
Mar 31, 2026Mercado abierto
Jan 12, 2026, 7:18 PM ETResolver
0x65070BE91...Denmark and Greenland authorities have repeatedly affirmed that sovereignty over the territory remains non-negotiable, blocking any Trump-proposed acquisition deal despite U.S. diplomatic pressure and a vague January 2026 "framework" announcement with NATO on updating the 1951 defense agreement for expanded military access and mineral rights. With no binding bilateral agreement signed or imminent as of late March, and only days until the March 31 deadline, traders reflect near-certain consensus at 99.8% "No" probability, viewing entrenched opposition and procedural hurdles—including Greenland's self-rule and Danish parliamentary approval—as insurmountable. Realistic shifts would require an unforeseen concession from Copenhagen or late-breaking executive action, though historical precedents favor stasis in territorial disputes.
Resumen experimental generado por IA con datos de Polymarket · Actualizado
Cuidado con los enlaces externos.
Cuidado con los enlaces externos.
Preguntas frecuentes