United States President Donald Trump announced on Wednesday that he had reached a “framework of a future deal” on Greenland with NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte.
He also withdrew his threat to impose 10 percent trade tariffs on eight European nations objecting to the sale of Greenland to the US – set to rise to 25 percent later in the year if no deal was reached.
Greenland is a self-governing territory which is part of the Kingdom of Denmark. Both Denmark and Greenland have repeatedly stated that the island is not for sale.
In a bid to defuse rising transatlantic tensions, Rutte met with Trump in Davos, Switzerland, during the annual summit of the World Economic Forum. During his speech at Davos on Wednesday, Trump reiterated that he wants to acquire Greenland, but ruled out taking the Arctic island by force.
What has Trump said about the ‘framework’ for a future deal?
In a Truth Social post on Wednesday, Trump said that following a “very productive” meeting with Rutte, he had formed the “framework of a future deal with respect to Greenland and, in fact, the entire Arctic Region”.
Trump added that, under this deal, he would not impose tariffs on the eight European countries that have opposed his attempt to acquire Greenland.
He added that additional discussions are being held about “The Golden Dome as it pertains to Greenland”.
The Golden Dome is Washington’s proposed multilayered missile defence programme, which is designed to counter aerial threats. Trump announced the project in May 2025. Under it, the US will deploy missile interceptors in space to shield against ballistic and hypersonic threats. The project is set to be completed by the end of Trump’s term in 2029.
In his post, Trump said more information about the framework would be made public as negotiations progress. These talks, he said, would be led by Vice President JD Vance, Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Special Envoy Steve Witkoff on the US side.
“We have a concept of a deal,” Trump told CNBC later on Wednesday.
But he offered no further details about what these negotiations, such as dates or venues for upcoming talks — would involve, nor specifics on who from Europe would join.
Why is the US at odds with Europe over Greenland?
On January 17, Trump announced that from February 1, Denmark, Norway, Sweden, France, Germany, the United Kingdom, the Netherlands and Finland would be charged a 10 percent tariff on their exports to the US.
On June 1, the tariff was to be increased to 25 percent, he said. “This Tariff will be due and payable until such time as a Deal is reached for the Complete and Total purchase of Greenland,” Trump wrote on Truth Social.
One day after he made this threat, the 27 members of the European Union convened for an emergency meeting to discuss their options. While many wanted to try to resolve the dispute via diplomatic efforts, some called for the implementation of a never-before-used “bazooka” package of retaliatory tariffs and trade restrictions. However, this could take up to a year to fully implement.
But following his meeting with Rutte on Wednesday, Trump withdrew his threat of tariffs and said a “framework for a future deal” had been reached.
Why does Trump want Greenland?
Trump, and US presidents before him, have coveted Greenland for its strategic position.
The sparsely populated Arctic island of 56,000 people – mostly Indigenous Inuit – is geographically in North America but politically part of Denmark, making it part of Europe.
Greenland’s geographical position between the Arctic and North Atlantic oceans provides the shortest air and sea routes between North America and Europe, making it crucial for US military operations and early-warning systems, especially around the Greenland-Iceland-United Kingdom gap, according to the Trump administration.
Greenland also has plentiful deposits of minerals, including large amounts of untapped rare earth metals, which are required for the production of technology ranging from smartphones to fighter jets. With global warming, more shipping routes around Greenland are opening up as the ice melts, making it of greater interest to many nations.
Did the US ever own Greenland?
During his speech in Davos on Wednesday, Trump said: “After the war, we gave Greenland back to Denmark. How stupid were we to do that? But we did it. But we gave it back.”
The US occupied Greenland in 1941 following Nazi Germany’s invasion of Denmark during World War II. It established a military and radio presence on the island, withdrawing following the end of the war. However, US forces have maintained a permanent presence at Pituffik Space Base, previously known as the Thule Air Base, in Greenland’s northwest ever since.
Denmark and the US reached an agreement in 1951, which allows the US to maintain military facilities in Greenland as part of mutual defence within the NATO framework.
Despite its presence on the island during World War II, the US never actually possessed the territory and its 1951 agreement with Denmark did not pass sovereignty of Greenland to the US.
What do we know about the framework of Trump’s future deal?
Specific details of the “framework” are unknown.
But Trump has described it as a pathway towards a “long-term deal”.
And he has specified some elements of what he expects from that deal. “It puts everybody in a really good position, especially as it pertains to security and to minerals,” Trump told reporters.
“It’s a deal that’s forever.”
But experts say much else about the framework is unclear.
“We still don’t know what ‘framework’ actually means: is it political signalling, or does it contain concrete commitments, timelines and legal hooks? We also don’t know who the real parties are (US-Denmark only, or US-Denmark-Greenland) and what Greenland has formally endorsed,” Christine Nissen, the chief analyst at the Copenhagen-based Think Tank Europa, told Al Jazeera.
It is unclear whether Greenland has agreed to the framework of any deal or whether Greenlandic or Danish authorities were even consulted.
“There can’t be a deal without having Greenland as part of the negotiations,” Sascha Faxe, a member of the Danish parliament, told Sky News on Wednesday.
“We have a Greenlandic MP in Denmark and she’s very clear that this is not a prerogative of Rutte and NATO,” Faxe said, referring to Aaja Chemnitz Larsen, who represents one of the two parliamentary seats for Greenland in the Danish parliament.
She added: “They are very clear – Greenland is not for sale, they are not for negotiations – so it’s not real negotiations, it’s two men who have had a conversation.”
On Wednesday night, Larsen wrote in Danish in a Facebook post: “NATO in no way has the right to negotiate anything on its own about us from Greenland while bypassing us. Nothing about us, without us.”
In an X post on Wednesday, Danish Foreign Minister Lars Lokke Rasmussen wrote: “The day is ending on a better note than it began,” welcoming Trump’s ruling out the European tariffs and taking Greenland by force. “Now, let’s sit down and find out how we can address the American security concerns in the Arctic while respecting the red lines of the (Kingdom of Denmark).”
It is also not clear which other European leaders are on board with the deal. EU leaders are convening in Brussels on Thursday for emergency talks over the matter.
In an X post on Wednesday, Italy’s Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni welcomed Trump’s decision to not charge tariffs on European countries. “As Italy has always maintained, it is essential to continue fostering dialogue between allied nations,” she wrote, without specifying details about Greenland or the deal.
If Washington ends up owning parts of Greenland as American overseas territory, it is not clear whether Denmark will hand over the land or whether the land will be purchased at a price. It is also not known what this hypothetical price would look like.
What natural resources does Greenland have?
Greenland is incredibly rich in minerals, including rare earth minerals used in the manufacture of batteries and high-tech industries crucial for defence. According to a 2023 survey, 25 of 34 minerals deemed “critical raw materials” by the European Commission were found in Greenland.
Greenland does not carry out the extraction of oil and gas, and its mining sector is opposed by its Indigenous population. The island’s economy is largely reliant on its fishing industry.
However, during his speech at Davos, Trump said that it was national security, and not minerals, that made it imperative for him to own Greenland.
“To get to this rare earth, you got to go through hundreds of feet of ice. That’s not the reason we need it. We need it for strategic national security and international security,” Trump said.
Referring to Trump during an interview with Fox News’s Special Report with Bret Baier on Wednesday, Rutte said: “He is very much focused on what do we need to do to make sure that that huge Arctic region – where change is taking place at the moment, where the Chinese and the Russians are more and more active – how we can protect it.”
Amid global warming, the vast untapped resources of the Arctic are becoming more accessible. Countries like the US, Canada, China and Russia are now eyeing these resources.
Russia and China have been working together to develop Arctic shipping routes as Moscow seeks to deliver more oil and gas to China amid Western sanctions, while Beijing seeks an alternative shipping route to reduce its dependence on the Strait of Malacca.
“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,” Reuters news agency reported, citing an unnamed NATO source.
On Wednesday, Russian news agencies quoted Russian President Vladimir Putin as saying: “What happens in Greenland is of absolutely no consequence to us.”
What about the ownership of Greenland?
On Wednesday, Rutte said during the interview that the issue of whether Greenland will remain Danish territory did not come up during his discussion with Trump.
When Rutte was asked whether Greenland would remain under the Kingdom of Denmark, he responded: “That issue did not come up any more in my conversations tonight with the president.”
Trump has previously said that Washington needs to own Greenland, rather than lease it.
“You defend ownership. You don’t defend leases. And we’ll have to defend Greenland. If we don’t do it, China or Russia will,” Trump told reporters at the White House on January 9.
During his speech at Davos, Trump reiterated that he wants Washington to own Greenland, despite the US military presence there under the 1951 agreement.
Nissen, of Think Tank Europa, explained that this agreement already grants the US very extensive operational rights in Greenland pertaining to construction, movement and logistics. But, she added, the arrangement is not territorial, and sovereignty sits with Denmark and Greenland’s self-government.
“The US cannot exercise civil authority, change laws, control borders as a state, or transfer the territory. So Denmark and Greenland’s hard red line is straightforward: no ‘ownership’ and no territorial transfer through a deal.”
On Wednesday, The New York Times, however, cited three unnamed senior officials involved in the latest Greenland talks, reporting on the possibility that the framework could involve conversations over giving Washington sovereign control over small pockets of Greenland for military bases.
In theory, these pockets would be similar to the concept of the UK’s bases in Cyprus, which are regarded as British territory, one of the officials told The Times, while another confirmed this.
The UK has two Sovereign Base Areas (SBAs) inside Cyprus, namely Akrotiri and Dhekelia. These are legally British-owned territories within Cyprus.
SBAs are purely for military use and governed almost entirely as military installations, where authority is essentially military and centralised.
“There are rumours that Trump may still imagine some form of US ownership of a very small piece of land, but Rutte has indicated that this was not substantively on the table,” Nissen said.
“If any element of the deal were to involve even a symbolic transfer of territory, that would cross a red line for Denmark, Greenland and Europe, and would set a dangerous precedent for sovereignty and the Western order.”
Nissen explained that even if there is a framework, Denmark and Greenland have legal options to constrain US ambitions for the island.
They could insist that US influence is limited to “rights of use” to territory rather than anything resembling sovereign control or exclusive jurisdiction. Essentially, she argued, they could use bureaucracy to bolster their positions.
“They can use governance tools that matter in practice: consultation clauses, joint oversight bodies, transparency requirements, clear review points and meaningful termination options – plus domestic law and permitting (land use, environment, infrastructure approvals) that can shape or slow what ambitions become on the ground.”
She explained that a likely outcome could involve strengthened US access to Greenland and an update to the 1951 defence deal — with more NATO branding, extra infrastructure and investment, and limited, targeted cooperation on minerals.
What are some overseas territories?
Greenland is actually one of two Danish self-governing overseas territories, the other one being the Faroe Islands.
The Arctic island was a Danish colony in the early 18th century, after an expedition led by Danish-Norwegian missionary Hans Egede arrived in 1721. In 1979, it became a self-governing territory. Since 2009, Greenland has the right to declare independence through a referendum.
The UK has 14 overseas territories across the Atlantic, Caribbean, Pacific and polar regions.
The inhabited ones, including Anguilla, Bermuda, the British Virgin Islands, Cayman Islands, Falkland Islands, Gibraltar and Montserrat, are mostly self‑governing, with the UK responsible for defence and foreign affairs.
The US has five permanently inhabited territories — Puerto Rico, Guam, the US Virgin Islands, American Samoa and the Northern Mariana Islands — all with local governments but limited federal representation, and Puerto Rico is the largest as a self‑governing commonwealth.
Washington also controls nine mostly uninhabited islands used mainly for military or strategic purposes.
France has 13 overseas territories spread across the Atlantic, Caribbean, Indian Ocean, Pacific and South America. China has two Special Administrative Regions (SARs), Hong Kong and Macau, which are generally autonomous in terms of political, economic and legal systems.
Australia, the Netherlands, Norway, New Zealand and Portugal also have overseas territories in different parts of the world with different arrangements for self-government.
