Trader consensus overwhelmingly favors no signed Trump-Denmark Greenland deal by March 31, reflecting stalled diplomatic negotiations despite an early January framework announcement allowing expanded U.S. military basing and mineral access in the Arctic territory while blocking Chinese and Russian influence. Denmark's firm rejection of sovereignty transfer, reiterated amid tariff threats and annexation rhetoric, culminated in snap parliamentary elections on March 24, where Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen gained support for resisting U.S. pressure. With the deadline expiring today absent any official signing ceremony or ratification, traders see insurmountable barriers from Danish constitutional constraints and NATO ally tensions; only a surprise last-hour bilateral announcement could shift this, though none has materialized.
Résumé expérimental généré par IA à partir des données Polymarket · Mis à jourOui
$1,082,083 Vol.
$1,082,083 Vol.
31 mars 2026
Oui
$1,082,083 Vol.
$1,082,083 Vol.
31 mars 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.Trader consensus overwhelmingly favors no signed Trump-Denmark Greenland deal by March 31, reflecting stalled diplomatic negotiations despite an early January framework announcement allowing expanded U.S. military basing and mineral access in the Arctic territory while blocking Chinese and Russian influence. Denmark's firm rejection of sovereignty transfer, reiterated amid tariff threats and annexation rhetoric, culminated in snap parliamentary elections on March 24, where Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen gained support for resisting U.S. pressure. With the deadline expiring today absent any official signing ceremony or ratification, traders see insurmountable barriers from Danish constitutional constraints and NATO ally tensions; only a surprise last-hour bilateral announcement could shift this, though none has materialized.
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.
Marché ouvert : Jan 12, 2026, 7:18 PM ET
Volume
$1,082,083Date de fin
31 mars 2026Marché ouvert
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.Trader consensus overwhelmingly favors no signed Trump-Denmark Greenland deal by March 31, reflecting stalled diplomatic negotiations despite an early January framework announcement allowing expanded U.S. military basing and mineral access in the Arctic territory while blocking Chinese and Russian influence. Denmark's firm rejection of sovereignty transfer, reiterated amid tariff threats and annexation rhetoric, culminated in snap parliamentary elections on March 24, where Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen gained support for resisting U.S. pressure. With the deadline expiring today absent any official signing ceremony or ratification, traders see insurmountable barriers from Danish constitutional constraints and NATO ally tensions; only a surprise last-hour bilateral announcement could shift this, though none has materialized.
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.
Volume
$1,082,083Date de fin
31 mars 2026Marché ouvert
Jan 12, 2026, 7:18 PM ETResolver
0x65070BE91...Trader consensus overwhelmingly favors no signed Trump-Denmark Greenland deal by March 31, reflecting stalled diplomatic negotiations despite an early January framework announcement allowing expanded U.S. military basing and mineral access in the Arctic territory while blocking Chinese and Russian influence. Denmark's firm rejection of sovereignty transfer, reiterated amid tariff threats and annexation rhetoric, culminated in snap parliamentary elections on March 24, where Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen gained support for resisting U.S. pressure. With the deadline expiring today absent any official signing ceremony or ratification, traders see insurmountable barriers from Danish constitutional constraints and NATO ally tensions; only a surprise last-hour bilateral announcement could shift this, though none has materialized.
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