President Trump's early 2026 tariff threats against Denmark and EU nations over Greenland access prompted a January Davos framework announcement, where he pledged no military force or further tariffs while claiming "total access" at no cost, including for missile defense infrastructure. Subsequent statements described negotiations as "pretty much agreed," fueling trader consensus at 56.5% for a signed deal by year-end. Recent U.S. requests to expand military presence in three Greenland areas, alongside Denmark's March election influenced by the dispute, sustain momentum despite Greenland's firm self-determination stance and vague framework details. Strategic Arctic competition with China and Russia bolsters optimism for a bases-access pact, though ratification hurdles and coalition dynamics pose risks ahead of December deadlines.
Résumé expérimental généré par IA à partir des données Polymarket · Mis à jourOui
$49,915 Vol.
$49,915 Vol.
Oui
$49,915 Vol.
$49,915 Vol.
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.
Marché ouvert : Jan 21, 2026, 5:59 PM ET
Resolver
0x65070BE91...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.
Resolver
0x65070BE91...President Trump's early 2026 tariff threats against Denmark and EU nations over Greenland access prompted a January Davos framework announcement, where he pledged no military force or further tariffs while claiming "total access" at no cost, including for missile defense infrastructure. Subsequent statements described negotiations as "pretty much agreed," fueling trader consensus at 56.5% for a signed deal by year-end. Recent U.S. requests to expand military presence in three Greenland areas, alongside Denmark's March election influenced by the dispute, sustain momentum despite Greenland's firm self-determination stance and vague framework details. Strategic Arctic competition with China and Russia bolsters optimism for a bases-access pact, though ratification hurdles and coalition dynamics pose risks ahead of December deadlines.
Résumé expérimental généré par IA à partir des données Polymarket · Mis à jour
Méfiez-vous des liens externes.
Méfiez-vous des liens externes.
Questions fréquentes