**Ongoing diplomatic negotiations following a January 2026 framework agreement continue to shape trader views on whether a U.S.-Greenland deal will be finalized by year-end.** President Trump has repeatedly highlighted Greenland’s strategic value for Arctic security, missile defense initiatives such as the Golden Dome, and countering potential Russian or Chinese influence, prompting sustained U.S. engagement with Danish and Greenlandic officials. After initial tariff threats on Denmark and European allies in mid-January, Trump announced a “framework of a future deal” with NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte at the Davos forum, ruling out military force and pausing tariffs in favor of expanded cooperation on bases, joint defense, and resource development. Denmark and Greenland maintain firm opposition to any transfer of sovereignty, limiting prospects for a full purchase while leaving room for narrower security or economic arrangements. As of mid-June 2026, no signed agreement has emerged despite the earlier framework, yet the absence of major new escalations or breakdowns sustains moderate market optimism. Traders appear to weigh Trump’s consistent prioritization of the issue and the six-month window remaining against the structural barriers of consent requirements and alliance dynamics.
基於Polymarket數據的AI實驗性摘要。這不是交易建議，也不影響該市場的結算方式。 · 更新於$80,875 交易量
$80,875 交易量
2026-12-31
$80,875 交易量
$80,875 交易量
2026-12-31
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.**Ongoing diplomatic negotiations following a January 2026 framework agreement continue to shape trader views on whether a U.S.-Greenland deal will be finalized by year-end.** President Trump has repeatedly highlighted Greenland’s strategic value for Arctic security, missile defense initiatives such as the Golden Dome, and countering potential Russian or Chinese influence, prompting sustained U.S. engagement with Danish and Greenlandic officials. After initial tariff threats on Denmark and European allies in mid-January, Trump announced a “framework of a future deal” with NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte at the Davos forum, ruling out military force and pausing tariffs in favor of expanded cooperation on bases, joint defense, and resource development.
Denmark and Greenland maintain firm opposition to any transfer of sovereignty, limiting prospects for a full purchase while leaving room for narrower security or economic arrangements. As of mid-June 2026, no signed agreement has emerged despite the earlier framework, yet the absence of major new escalations or breakdowns sustains moderate market optimism. Traders appear to weigh Trump’s consistent prioritization of the issue and the six-month window remaining against the structural barriers of consent requirements and alliance dynamics.
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.
市場開放時間： Jan 21, 2026, 5:59 PM ET
交易量
$80,875結束日期
2026-12-31市場開放時間
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.**Ongoing diplomatic negotiations following a January 2026 framework agreement continue to shape trader views on whether a U.S.-Greenland deal will be finalized by year-end.** President Trump has repeatedly highlighted Greenland’s strategic value for Arctic security, missile defense initiatives such as the Golden Dome, and countering potential Russian or Chinese influence, prompting sustained U.S. engagement with Danish and Greenlandic officials. After initial tariff threats on Denmark and European allies in mid-January, Trump announced a “framework of a future deal” with NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte at the Davos forum, ruling out military force and pausing tariffs in favor of expanded cooperation on bases, joint defense, and resource development.
Denmark and Greenland maintain firm opposition to any transfer of sovereignty, limiting prospects for a full purchase while leaving room for narrower security or economic arrangements. As of mid-June 2026, no signed agreement has emerged despite the earlier framework, yet the absence of major new escalations or breakdowns sustains moderate market optimism. Traders appear to weigh Trump’s consistent prioritization of the issue and the six-month window remaining against the structural barriers of consent requirements and alliance dynamics.
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.
交易量
$80,875結束日期
2026-12-31市場開放時間
Jan 21, 2026, 5:59 PM ETResolver
0x65070BE91...**Ongoing diplomatic negotiations following a January 2026 framework agreement continue to shape trader views on whether a U.S.-Greenland deal will be finalized by year-end.** President Trump has repeatedly highlighted Greenland’s strategic value for Arctic security, missile defense initiatives such as the Golden Dome, and countering potential Russian or Chinese influence, prompting sustained U.S. engagement with Danish and Greenlandic officials. After initial tariff threats on Denmark and European allies in mid-January, Trump announced a “framework of a future deal” with NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte at the Davos forum, ruling out military force and pausing tariffs in favor of expanded cooperation on bases, joint defense, and resource development. Denmark and Greenland maintain firm opposition to any transfer of sovereignty, limiting prospects for a full purchase while leaving room for narrower security or economic arrangements. As of mid-June 2026, no signed agreement has emerged despite the earlier framework, yet the absence of major new escalations or breakdowns sustains moderate market optimism. Traders appear to weigh Trump’s consistent prioritization of the issue and the six-month window remaining against the structural barriers of consent requirements and alliance dynamics.
基於Polymarket數據的AI實驗性摘要。這不是交易建議，也不影響該市場的結算方式。 · 更新於
警惕外部連結哦。
警惕外部連結哦。
Frequently Asked Questions