US President Donald Trump has announced there is a “framework of a future deal with respect to Greenland”.
Wednesday’s statement came as a surprise after days and weeks of mounting tensions – even a threat to use military force to seize the semi-autonomous territory of Nato ally Denmark.
So what could this deal entail and will it be acceptable to Denmark and Greenland – both of which have made it clear they will not relinquish sovereignty of the world’s largest island in the Arctic?
What has been said about the framework deal?
President Trump made the announcement after talks at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland.
“Based upon a very productive meeting that I have had with the Secretary General of NATO, Mark Rutte, we have formed the framework of a future deal with respect to Greenland,” he said on his Truth Social media platform.
He did not give details, but said talks would continue to reach the agreement.
Rutte said he had not discussed the key issue of Danish sovereignty over Greenland in his meeting with Trump.
Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen said Danes could negotiate on everything, but “we cannot negotiate on our sovereignty”.
Greenland’s prime minister echoed Frederiksen, saying sovereignty was “a red line”. Significantly, Jens-Frederik Nielsen said he did not know the details of the deal being discussed.
Is there any detail? What are the options?
Citing anonymous officials, the New York Times said one idea entailed Denmark ceding sovereignty over small areas of Greenland where the US would build military bases.
This arrangement would be similar to the status of two such bases in Cyprus, which have been under UK sovereignty since Cyprus became independent in 1960.
It is not clear how that model would apply if both Denmark and Greenland reject relinquishing sovereignty.
In arguing in favour of seizing Greenland, Trump has mentioned the threat of Chinese and Russian vessels around the island, even though Denmark says there is no threat “today”.
On this point, Nato allies have tried to reassure the US that they will boost security in the Arctic and Mark Rutte says the framework deal will also require this contribution.
“I have no doubt we can do this quite fast. Certainly I would hope for 2026, I hope even early in 2026,” he said on Thursday.
UK Foreign Secretary Yvette Cooper said the UK had called for setting up an Arctic Sentry “very similar to the approach that Nato has taken to the Baltic Sentry” – a mission to increase the surveillance of ships in the Baltic Sea.
Will any deal short of ‘ownership’ please Trump?
Under a 1951 agreement with Denmark, the US can send as many troops as it wants to Greenland. It already has more than 100 military personnel permanently stationed at its Pituffik base in the north-western tip of the territory.
So discussions to reach a deal may centre on a renegotiation of that agreement, according to US officials.
Hovering over negotiations is Trump’s insistence to “own” Greenland.
If he were to have his way, in addition to overcoming the red lines over sovereignty, negotiators would also need to find a solution to the constitutional ban on the sale of land in Greenland.
One model is offered by the US naval base at Guantánamo Bay in Cuba, which has been under total US control since 1903 after a kind of permanent lease agreement.
It is not clear whether these were some of the options that prompted Trump’s U-turn at Davos to drop the threat of military action to annex Greenland to the relief of his Nato allies.
Nato was founded in 1949 on the principle that an external attack on one ally is an attack on all. Denmark had made it clear that a military attack by an ally on another would spell the end of the trans-Atlantic alliance, where the US is the major partner.
The fact that Trump’s announcement of a “framework” came after he met Mark Rutte has prompted some concern in Greenland that negotiations on their future were being conducted in their absence.
On Thursday, Greenland’s Foreign Minister Vivian Motzfeldt said his government had not asked him to negotiate on their behalf but to convey “the red lines directly to President Trump”.
Rutte has not confirmed this has been the case.
He has been criticised for the praise he has constantly showered on President Trump.
Why does Trump want Greenland? Is it minerals?
Trump says Greenland is essential for his plan to build a Golden Dome defence system, designed to protect the US against missile attacks from Russia and China, and that European allies could co-operate in this endeavour.
The island has vast – and largely untapped – reserves of rare earth minerals, many of which are crucial for technologies including mobile phones and electric vehicles.
Trump has not said the US is after Greenland’s riches, but that a US control over the island “puts everybody in a really good position, especially as it pertains to security and to minerals”.