US President Donald Trump has announced 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 in the Arctic?
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.
He did not give details, but said talks would continue to reach the deal.
Rutte mentioned that 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 any agreement must still be hammered out between Greenland, Denmark, and the US.
Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen stated, We cannot negotiate on our sovereignty. I have been informed that this has not been the case either, in a statement on Thursday.
Nearly 24 hours after Trump's announcement, Greenlandic Prime Minister Jens-Frederik Nielsen expressed his willingness to negotiate a better partnership with the US, but asserted that sovereignty was a red line.
Is there any detail? What are the options?
The New York Times reported that one idea under discussion was for Denmark to cede sovereignty over small areas of Greenland where the US would build military bases, analogous to the UK-controlled bases in Cyprus.
However, Denmark and Greenland have rejected relinquishing sovereignty.
Trump has cited the potential threats from Chinese and Russian vessels around the island as a justification for the deal, despite Denmark asserting no immediate threat exists.
Mark Rutte informed the press that any framework deal would require contributions from NATO allies to enhance security in the Arctic.
Will any deal short of 'ownership' please Trump?
The US has maintained a military presence in Greenland since World War II. Discussions may focus on renegotiating existing agreements regarding this military presence, moving towards a possible deal.
In prior statements, Trump has emphasized that ownership rather than a lease is crucial to the US intentions regarding Greenland.
In conclusion, the ongoing discussions about Greenland signify a complex negotiation landscape that intertwines national pride, international relations, and security strategies.
