Despite firm rejections from Denmark and Greenland affirming that sovereignty over the autonomous territory remains non-negotiable, trader consensus prices a Trump-Denmark Greenland deal at just 15% likelihood by June 30, reflecting stalled diplomacy after a January 2026 NATO framework expanded U.S. military access and mineral cooperation under the 1951 defense agreement but excluded any transfer of control. Recent tensions, including reports of U.S. influence operations targeting Greenland politicians and public unease voiced by its prime minister, have deepened NATO ally frictions without advancing negotiations. With the May 19-20 Future Greenland conference approaching—attended by U.S. envoy Jeff Landry and Ambassador Ken Howery—traders anticipate no breakthrough sufficient to formalize a full deal amid constitutional barriers and mutual recriminations.
Resumen experimental generado por IA con datos de Polymarket. Esto no es asesoramiento de trading y no influye en cómo se resuelve este mercado. · ActualizadoTrump-Denmark Greenland deal signed by June 30?
Trump-Denmark Greenland deal signed by June 30?
NUEVO
NUEVO
30 jun 2026
NUEVO
NUEVO
30 jun 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 June 30, 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.Despite firm rejections from Denmark and Greenland affirming that sovereignty over the autonomous territory remains non-negotiable, trader consensus prices a Trump-Denmark Greenland deal at just 15% likelihood by June 30, reflecting stalled diplomacy after a January 2026 NATO framework expanded U.S. military access and mineral cooperation under the 1951 defense agreement but excluded any transfer of control. Recent tensions, including reports of U.S. influence operations targeting Greenland politicians and public unease voiced by its prime minister, have deepened NATO ally frictions without advancing negotiations. With the May 19-20 Future Greenland conference approaching—attended by U.S. envoy Jeff Landry and Ambassador Ken Howery—traders anticipate no breakthrough sufficient to formalize a full deal amid constitutional barriers and mutual recriminations.
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 June 30, 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: Apr 1, 2026, 3:42 PM ET
Volumen
$6,933Fecha de finalización
30 jun 2026Mercado abierto
Apr 1, 2026, 3:42 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 June 30, 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.Despite firm rejections from Denmark and Greenland affirming that sovereignty over the autonomous territory remains non-negotiable, trader consensus prices a Trump-Denmark Greenland deal at just 15% likelihood by June 30, reflecting stalled diplomacy after a January 2026 NATO framework expanded U.S. military access and mineral cooperation under the 1951 defense agreement but excluded any transfer of control. Recent tensions, including reports of U.S. influence operations targeting Greenland politicians and public unease voiced by its prime minister, have deepened NATO ally frictions without advancing negotiations. With the May 19-20 Future Greenland conference approaching—attended by U.S. envoy Jeff Landry and Ambassador Ken Howery—traders anticipate no breakthrough sufficient to formalize a full deal amid constitutional barriers and mutual recriminations.
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 June 30, 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
$6,933Fecha de finalización
30 jun 2026Mercado abierto
Apr 1, 2026, 3:42 PM ETResolver
0x65070BE91...Despite firm rejections from Denmark and Greenland affirming that sovereignty over the autonomous territory remains non-negotiable, trader consensus prices a Trump-Denmark Greenland deal at just 15% likelihood by June 30, reflecting stalled diplomacy after a January 2026 NATO framework expanded U.S. military access and mineral cooperation under the 1951 defense agreement but excluded any transfer of control. Recent tensions, including reports of U.S. influence operations targeting Greenland politicians and public unease voiced by its prime minister, have deepened NATO ally frictions without advancing negotiations. With the May 19-20 Future Greenland conference approaching—attended by U.S. envoy Jeff Landry and Ambassador Ken Howery—traders anticipate no breakthrough sufficient to formalize a full deal amid constitutional barriers and mutual recriminations.
Resumen experimental generado por IA con datos de Polymarket. Esto no es asesoramiento de trading y no influye en cómo se resuelve este mercado. · Actualizado
Cuidado con los enlaces externos.
Cuidado con los enlaces externos.
Preguntas frecuentes