EPAUS President Donald Trump has announced that there is a “framework of a future deal with respect to Greenland”.
The statement came as a surprise after days of mounting tensions, culminating with a threat to impose economic sanctions on eight close US allies which have opposed his plans to seize the semi-autonomous territory of 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.
What has been said about the framework deal?
President Trump made the announcement on his Truth Social media platform on Wednesday, 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.
“This solution, if consummated, will be a great one for the United States of America, and all Nato Nations.”
He did not give details, but said talks would continue to reach the deal.
Rutte, for his part, said he had not discussed the key issue of Danish sovereignty over Greenland in his meeting with Trump.
The view in Denmark is that the issue is far from over and that any agreement must still be hammered out together between Greenland and Denmark and the US.
Danish Prime Minister Metter Frederiksen said she been having regular conversations with Rutte and the Danes could negotiate “on everything political; security, investments, economy”.
“But we cannot negotiate on our sovereignty. I have been informed that this has not been the case either,” she said in a statement on Thursday.
Nato spokeswoman Allison Hart said in a statement after the meeting between Trump and Rutte: “Negotiations between Denmark, Greenland, and the United States will go forward aimed at ensuring that Russia and China never gain a foothold – economically or militarily – in Greenland.”
However, one of two Greenlandic lawmakers in the Danish parliament Aaja Chenmitz said “Nato in no case has the right to negotiate on anything without us, Greenland. Nothing about us without us”.
The UK Foreign Secretary Yvette Cooper said she hoped this meant that there would be “the direct discussions that Denmark had asked for, for Denmark, Greenland and the United States on the way forward around Greenland, protecting Greenland’s sovereignty”.
Is there any detail about the possible deal?
Denmark and Greenland’s comments about sovereignty being non-negotiable. appeared to push back on reports that among the ideas being mooted unofficially is an arrangement similar to two military bases in Cyprus which are controlled by the UK.
The New York Times quotes anonymous officials as saying one idea under discussion is for Denmark to cede sovereignty over small areas of Greenland where the US would build military bases, as in the UK model.
Akrotiri and Dhekelia have been under UK sovereignty since Cyprus became independent in 1960. That treaty has been modified since, but essentially it is considered British territory.
Asked whether whether she knew what was in the framework agreement, Yvette Cooper said only that there were two things that she now expected to happen.
“The first is a return to some of the discussions that Denmark and Greenland had asked for with the United States, where they had begun those discussions in Washington last week and that’s what they want to focus on,” the UK foreign secretary said.
“It’s some very practical discussions about Greenland’s security, whilst being very, very clear that Greenland sovereignty is not up for negotiation.”
In arguing in favour of seizing Greenland, Trump has mentioned the threat of Chinese and Russian vessels around the island, even though defence officials insist there has been no increased threat from Russia and China recently.
On this point, Nato allies have tried to reassure the US that they will boost up security in the Arctic and Mark Rutte told Reuters news agency on Thursday that the framework deal would also require this contribution.
“We will come together in Nato with our senior commanders to work out what is necessary,” he said, adding: “I have no doubt we can do this quite fast. Certainly I would hope for 2026, I hope even early in 2026.”
One of the ideas the UK has been calling for is to set up an Arctic Sentry, said Yvette Cooper on Thursday – which was a “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 after critical undersea cables were severed.
Will any deal short of ‘ownership’ please Trump?
The US has had a military presence in Greenland since after World War Two.
Under a 1951 agreement with Denmark, the US can bring 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.
The US does have military bases in many countries – including Germany – but they do not constitute sovereign territory.
Trump has insisted a lease agreement over Greenland is not good enough.
“Countries have to have ownership and you defend ownership, you don’t defend leases. And we’ll have to defend Greenland,” he said two weeks ago.
In order to acquire the island, he has threatened to use force – until a U-turn in Davos where he dropped that threat to the relief of his Nato allies.
Nato was founded in 1949 on the principle that an attack on one ally is an attack on all. These attacks were meant to come from outside, and Denmark had made it clear a military attack would spell the end of the trans-Atlantic alliance, where the US is the major partner.
Why does Trump want Greenland?
Trump has sought to buy Greenland off Denmark since his first time in office – and he is not the only US president to try to do so.
Trump says the US needs Greenland to protect against possible attacks from Russia and China.
He has also said Greenland is essential for his plan to build a Golden Dome defence system, designed to protect the US against missile attacks, and that European allies could co-operate in this endeavour.
Along with Greenland’s strategic location, the US has spoken about the island’s 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”.
“It’s a deal that’s forever.”
